Tag Archives: FOX

Fair and Balanced?

Received this from an Marine brother, Ed “Mac” McCloskey , an 8th & I Alum a few years before me. He got it from a retired US Army LTC. I am in total agreement with Mac and his LTC friend on their  assessments  of the current state of FOX News.  Personally, I gave up FOX earlier this year when it was apparent the Murdoch kids were going to the left. No more “Fair and Balanced  – You Decide,” that’s all gone except for Tucker Carlson, who I still watch. And who knows, they may drop him soon?

What a shame, the last of the holdouts finally gives it. Change the channel, or best just shut the damn TV off, there are none left worth watching. 

I’m going to use his letter as a basis and send one myself, how about you? Or better yet, see who sponsors FOX News, that may be the best approach — money talks.

LOS ANGELES, CA – OCTOBER 21: Political commentator Tucker Carlson speaks during Politicon 2018 at Los Angeles Convention Center on October 21, 2018 in Los Angeles, California. (Photo by Chelsea Guglielmino/Getty Images)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Fox and Friends and Fox News:

Please pass this to your corporate bosses.

Like many of your viewers, I think, it is my perception, especially this year, that your news organization has been drifting to the left on the political spectrum.

When Fox News started reporting the news and with evening commentary shows, your motto was Fair and Balanced … We Report, You Decide.”

You have moved from that mission statement.  In particular, your polling, your reporting during the 2020 election campaign has been anything but “Fair And Balanced.”

I did not become a regular viewer and then become a conservative; I became a regular viewer because I am a conservative.  Likewise, I have written to the Republican party over the years that I support the party because, as a conservative, I have nowhere else to go and to have my views respected on the nature of our political system, the role of government at all levels, the importance, in particular, of the Bill of Rights, to the preservation of individual liberties in the face of an ever-expanding Federal Government.

This year, especially, you have participated in and reported on polls that were clearly out of line with the general mood of the Republic.  Your polling, like in 2016, was wildly inaccurate.  Rush Limbaugh informed us on his Friday radio show that he had had a communication from Brett Bair that Mr Bair had been told that Rush said that President Trump had lost the election.  Rush addressed this immediately at the beginning of the next segment of the show.  He said that he had told Brett that that was untrue and warned Brett against joining the other main stream media outlets in calling the race for Biden.  Rush stated on the show that the reason that CNN and MSNBC were begging Fox to call the race was to complete the humiliation of the President and of Fox News for supporting Conservatives all these years.

About 24 hours later, Fox News did exactly what Rush warned you not to do.

A Roger Ailes-led version of Fox News, with so many eye witness allegations of potential voter fraud, would never have done what you did on Saturday, November 7th.  That Fox News would have been pursuing those stories to determine the truth of the situation.  The Sons-of-Rupert-Murdoch-version of Fox News happily jumped on the “steal the vote” bandwagon and called the race for Biden.

Specifically,

  1. You called the state races for Biden using apparently entirely different standards that for Trump.
  2. When it became readily apparent and easily proven that there were many ballot issues in the battleground states, you called AZ for Biden and left that call in place even in the face of knowledge that there were many ballots to be counted from areas of the state where the President is wildly popular.
  3. You left in place your decision to call MI and PA for Biden when it is clear that there were “shenanigans” underway, including, but not limited to, legally certified Republican poll watchers being denied access to precinct counting areas, the counties in battleground states using a particular counting software were reporting “glitches” involving thousands of ballots in each county, that had been marked for Trump and down-ballot Republicans, were switched to Biden and down-ballot Democrats.
  4. In Democrat controlled county after county, counting of ballots received in early voting and on election day, counting was mysteriously stopped for hours at a time, at the same time that Republican poll watchers were being denied their legally certified opportunity to observe the counting.  Magically, in those jurisdictions, previously unknown ballots were found that, unlike the rest of the state, broke along the same percentages as the previous Trump vs Biden votes, were entirely marked only for Biden.

I could cite many other instances.  However, my deepest disappointment is the general arrogance of the main stream media, which you have joined, to believe that it is your duty to determine who wins and loses these elections.

I am, therefore, declaring my independence from you for the foreseeable future.  I will get my news and commentary from other, less biased sources.  I may be the only viewer you lose because of your conduct this year but I doubt it.  I have already seen on line that there is a growing backlash against Fox for how you have done your job in the run up to this election.  If and when someone advised me that you have returned to your previous standard of “Fair and Balanced … We Report, You Decide,” I may return.

Sincerely,
Ron Kohl
LTC, US Army (Ret)
Former Fox News Viewer

Originally posted 2020-11-09 14:47:23.

America’s Chris Wallace Problem

Is anything more dangerous to our country than media bias?
I doubt it. Chris Wallace is an arrogant, egotistical smartass who should never have been allowed to moderate a presidential debate. He is as sneaky as a lizard, and that’s what makes him so dangerous to the world of respected journalism. Mr. McCain spells out just one example of how he posed questions to Trump. Disgusting Wallace, you piece of garbage.
Robert Stacy McCain
Chris Wallace on Fox News yesterday (YouTube screenshot)
When will Chris Wallace apologize to Katie Pavlich? More than once, Wallace has insulted his Fox News colleague on the network, as in a January segment about the impeachment of President Trump, when Wallace barked at Pavlich, “Get your facts straight!” As it turned out in that case, Pavlich was right and Wallace was wrong — and not accidentally so. The question at issue was Democrats’ demand that the Senate trial over what was called “Ukrainegate” include testimony from additional witnesses. Pavlich said this was unprecedented, and contended it was not the Senate’s fault that “the House did not come with a complete case.” Wallace began barking about “facts” in an attempt to rescue Democrats from the consequences of their failure.

Why did Wallace use his position as moderator of a presidential debate to parrot Gov. Brown’s rhetoric by claiming that “white supremacists and militia groups” were somehow to blame for the Portland riots?

Wallace’s dismal performance as moderator in Tuesday’s presidential debate reminded many viewers of such previous instances in which the Fox News Sunday host has shown his prejudice against Trump. And this matters, not only because of how that ugly televised carnival might affect the election, but because of what it tells us about the sad state of journalism in America. If Wallace is, Dov Fischer says, “the fairest moderator we can hope for in today’s Left-dominated media,” there is no hope for fairness. But what about those “facts” that Wallace presumed to lecture Katie Pavlich about? Even if we must resign ourselves to partisan prejudice from the media, must we tolerate journalists trafficking in outright lies?

That’s what Wallace did in Tuesday’s debate. Consider this question he aimed at President Trump: “You have repeatedly criticized the vice president for not specifically calling out Antifa and other left-wing extremist groups, but are you willing tonight to condemn white supremacists and militia groups and to say that they need to stand down and not add to the violence in a number of these cities, as we saw in Kenosha and as we’ve seen in Portland?”

Where is the evidence that “white supremacists and militia groups” were to blame for violence in Kenosha or Portland, Oregon? Wallace’s question was not only tendentious, but counterfactual. As regards Portland, Wallace seemed to be echoing Oregon’s woefully misguided Democratic governor. After a man who described himself as “100% Antifa” murdered a Trump supporter on the streets of Portland Aug.29, Gov. Kate Brown issued this rather bizarre statement:

As elected officials and community leaders, we are coming together to condemn the acts of violence in Portland that have occurred as thousands of Oregonians have been peacefully protesting for racial justice and police accountability. The violence must stop. There is no place for white supremacy or vigilantism in Oregon. All who perpetrate violent crimes must be held equally accountable. Together, we are committing ourselves to do the hard work that will bring meaningful change for racial justice and police reform.

What did the murder of Trump supporter Aaron “Jay” Danielson have to do with “racial justice”? Danielson was white, but so was the Antifa radical who shot him to death, Michael Reinoehl. As for holding those “who perpetrate violent crimes … equally accountable,” why did Gov. Brown let Antifa wreak havoc in Portland for more than three months before deciding that violence is bad? Where is the evidence that “white supremacy” played any role in Portland’s anti-police riots?

More importantly, however, why did Chris Wallace use his position as moderator of a presidential debate to parrot Gov. Brown’s rhetoric by claiming that “white supremacists and militia groups” were somehow to blame for the Portland riots? Such a claim is not journalism but political propaganda, and that goes doubly so for what happened in Kenosha. In case you’ve been hiding in a cave for the past five weeks, riots erupted in this Wisconsin city on Aug. 23 after a police officer shot a black man, Jacob Blake, who had violated a restraining order and had a warrant against him on sexual assault charges. On the first night of what the national media insisted on calling “mostly peaceful protests” the BLM mob “hurled debris, smashed windows,” and set fire to the Kenosha County Courthouse and several vehicles.

The next morning, the Biden campaign issued a statement that declared, “We must dismantle systemic racism. It is the urgent task before us.” The BLM mob apparently took Biden’s words as a command to “dismantle” Kenosha. On the second night of riots in the city, the arsonists torched a car dealership, a furniture store, and a state Department of Corrections office, among other targets. Perhaps Chris Wallace can explain how “white supremacists and militia groups” were responsible for this violence, but probably what he had in mind were the events of the third night of the Kenosha riots. That was when a convicted child rapist named Joseph Don “JoJo” Rosenbaum attacked 17-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse.

By the way, has Chris Wallace ever mentioned Rosenbaum’s criminal record on Fox News? He considers himself authorized to lecture others about how important to “get your facts straight,” why wouldn’t he want to share with Fox News viewers the fact that Rosenbaum was convicted of raping five pre-teen boys in Tucson? The story of what happened in Kenosha on the night of Aug. 25 doesn’t make sense if you don’t know that the man who attacked Rittenhouse was a very dangerous criminal who had served more than a decade in Arizona prisons.

Rosenbaum was captured on video that night taunting a group of armed men who were guarding a Kenosha business against the angry mob: “Shoot me n****!” When Rosenbaum later set a fire, Rittenhouse ran with a fire extinguisher to put out the blaze. Video shows Rosenbaum chasing the teenager across a parking lot where he cornered him, and Rittenhouse fired in self-defense, fatally wounding his attacker. As I explained last month (“The Media Lynching of Kyle Rittenhouse,” Sept. 3), Rosenbaum’s attack set off the chain of events in which two other rioters were shot, after the angry mob chased Rittenhouse. An 11-minute video produced by attorneys for Rittenhouse clearly shows that the teenager acted in self-defense.

Contrary to what Chris Wallace asserted to a TV audience of millions of Americans during Tuesday’s debate, Kyle Rittenhouse is not a “white supremacist,” nor is he a member of any “militia group.” That was made clear in a report Thursday by two young Wisconsin contributors to the Federalist, Evita Duffy and Kylee Zempel, who were on the scene in Kenosha during the riots:

Robert Stacy McCain is the author of Sex Trouble: Essays on Radical Feminism and the War Against Human Nature. He blogs at TheOtherMcCain.com.

Originally posted 2020-10-02 12:23:35.

Impeachment Coup Analytics

A very well written article by someone with a brain and knows how to use it, oh, and BTW, a Californian.

The Democrats have exhausted every other mechanism for destroying Trump—and they are running out of time before November 2020 election.

Victor Davis Hanson

– September 29th, 2019

Aside from the emotional issue that Democrats, Never-Trumpers, and celebrities loathe Donald Trump, recently Representative Al Green (D-Texas) reminded us why the Democrats are trying to impeach the president rather than just defeat him in the 2020 general election.

“To defeat him at the polls would do history a disservice, would do our nation a disservice,” Green said.  “I’m concerned that if we don’t impeach the president, he will get re-elected.”

Translated, that means Green accepts either that Trump’s record is too formidable or that the agendas of his own party’s presidential candidates are too frightening for the American people to elect one of them. And that possibility is simply not permissible. Thus, impeachment is the only mechanism left to abort an eight-year Trump presidency—on a purely partisan vote to preclude an election, and thus contrary to the outlines of impeachment as set out by the Constitution.

Consider it another way: Why is it that the House is controlled by Democrats, yet its leadership is not pushing through any of the policy proposals voiced so openly on the Democratic primary stage?

Why aren’t progressive representatives introducing bills to pay reparations to African Americans, to legalize infanticide in some cases of late-term abortion, to offer free medical care to illegal aliens, to confiscate AR-15s, to extend Medicare for all, to impose a wealth tax and raise top rates to between 70 and 90 percent, to abolish student debt and ensure free college for all, or to grant blanket amnesty to those currently living in the country illegally?

Simple answer: none of those issues poll anywhere near 50 percent approval. And no Democratic candidate would expect to beat Trump as the emissary of such an agenda.

If the economy was in a recession, if we were embroiled in another Iraq-like or Vietnam-sort of war, and if Trump’s polls were below 40 percent, then the Democrats would just wait 13 months and defeat him at the polls.

But without a viable agenda and because they doubt they can stop Trump’s reelection bid, they feel they have no recourse but to impeach. If Trump were to be reelected, not a shred of Barack Obama’s “fundamental transformation” would be left, and the strict constructionist Supreme Court would haunt progressives for a quarter-century.

Why Impeachment Now?

The Democrats have exhausted every other mechanism for destroying Trump—and they are running out of time before November 2020 election.

Think of what we have witnessed since the 2016 election. Do we even remember charges that voting machines in the 2016 election were rigged, and the efforts to subvert Electoral College voting, or to invoke the Logan Act, the emoluments clause, and the 25th Amendment?

The “collusion” and “obstruction” fantasies of the Mueller investigation now seem like ancient history. So do the James Comey leaks, the palace coup of Andrew McCabe, the Trump tax records, the celebrity rhetoric about blowing up, shooting, stabbing, burning and variously killing off the president of the United States—along with the satellite frenzies of Stormy Daniels, Michael Avenatti, Charlottesville, Jussie Smollett, the Covington Kids, and the Kavanaugh hearings.

What is left but to try the new “Ukraine collusion”—especially given three other considerations?

First, volatile and always changing polls appearing to favor impeachment roughly reflect Trump’s own popularity (or lack of same). Around 45-46 percent of Americans do not want him impeached and about the same or slightly more say they do.

Second, the hard left-wing of the party might not yet control all the Democrats, but it does not matter because they are clearly younger, more energized, and better organized. And they want something to show for all their social media and photo-op grandstanding, given their socialist agenda is mysteriously moribund.

Third, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is said to oppose impeachment on pragmatic grounds, but I am not sure that is right. It’s the equivalent of saying Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) was opposed to the progressive character assassination of Brett Kavanaugh. Neither is or was true.

A better description would be that Pelosi and Feinstein simply go along with the perceived 51-plus percent surge of their party, and sit back gleefully watching the fireworks happen, willing to jump in or pull back depending on the atmospherics and polling. Impeachment, remember, will make the Kavanaugh hearings look like a seminar on etiquette, and so everything and anything can happen once dozens of unhinged leftists are unbound.

Be prepared for a half-dozen Christine Blasey Ford-type witnesses to pop up, and 20 or so unhinged Cory Booker-esque “I am Spartacus” performance acts, along with a whole slew of new Steele dossiers—all interspersed with breathless CNN bulletins announcing new fake news developments with “the walls are closing in” and “the end is near” prognostications. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) is already reading fantasies to the House Intelligence Committee and passing them off as the text of Trump’s phone call to Ukraine’s new president. Only after he was called on such absurdities did he describe his performance as a parody.

Facts Won’t Matter that Much

The Left is hellbent on impeachment and the absence of a case won’t matter. They do not care if they will sow the wind and reap the whirlwind.

In the coming days, after all, we will probably learn that the whistle blower’s “Schiff dossier” was prepared by ex-Lawfare-type lawyers in service to House Democrats, who just needed a vessel to pass off the hit as a genuine cry of the heart, rather than a scripted attack with all the Steele dossier/Mueller report/Comey memo fingerprints: classification obfuscations, footnotes to liberal media hit pieces, pseudo-scholarly references to court cases, and lawsuit-avoiding, preemptive disclaimers about not actually possessing firsthand knowledge of any of the evidence, prepped hearsay, supposition, and the subjunctive and optative mood composition.

In a sane world, the impeachers would worry their charges that Trump forced Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky to investigate his possible 2020 Democratic opponent Joe Biden might boomerang. After all, Trump never actually cut off Ukrainian aid. Nor did he outline a quid pro quo deal. Essentially he is accused of unduly asking a foreign president to clamp down on corruption in his midst going back to 2016. So what? Especially if there is something more to the strange antics of Hunter Biden and CrowdStrike.

Biden’s problems are not such thought crimes, but are confirmed by his own boasting: that he used the clout of the United States to help his own family financially, by threatening to cut off U.S. aid unless a Ukrainian state prosecutor looking into his own son’s suspicious lobbying was fired within six hours. And in Biden’s own words, “Son of a bitch,” he was fired.

In contrast, Trump might have been all over the map in his call, but he kept the aid to Ukraine coming without demanding the scalp of any Ukrainian official. In some sense, Trump’s culpability boils down to one issue: progressives believe that in not-too-veiled a manner, he threatened a foreign government to start going after the Biden family without cause, whose patriarch Joe might be Trump’s 2020 election opponent.

The other half of the country believes that what is material is not Biden’s current transient electoral status (he is not now and may not be the Democratic nominee), but the fact that he was vice president of the United States when he used his office to threaten the loss of foreign aid to stop investigations of his son, who was using his father’s position to further his own profiteering.

Given that Trump denies any quid pro quo and his call supports that fact, while Biden, on the other hand, openly brags that he made threats which made the Ukrainian to cave (“in six hours”), one can draw one’s own conclusions.

For now, we await more documents—with caveats that the canny Ukrainians, for their own self-interest, will predicate their release of information on the likelihood of which party will win the 2020 election.

The Left hints it has lots of incriminating documents outlining a quid pro quo threat; conservatives suspect that Ukrainian and legal documents will show the prosecutor was neither unethical nor uninterested in Hunter Biden, but was fired precisely because he was not corrupt and very much concerned with Biden.

As far as precedent, there is a good recent example. Barack Obama got caught promising to consider cuts in Eastern-European-based missile defense if Vladimir Putin would give him some room during his reelection campaign.

Translated into Adam Schiff’s Mafiosi parody lingo: Putin would calm down on the international stage to make the U.S.-Russia “reset” look good, Obama would then get rid of Eastern-European missile defense, and Obama would get reelected in 2012.

And all three of those events transpired as planned—one can surmise whether any of the three would have happened without Obama compliance with Russian conditions. Remember, Obama’s quid pro quo was caught on a hot mic on the premise that what he said to Russian President Medvedev was never supposed to be heard. “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved,” Obama said. “But it’s important for him [Putin] to give me space . . . This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.”

Once that understanding was excused, and the media was mute about such collusion, can any notion of collusion as a crime still exist?

Conspiracy Theories

Finally, who are the winners in these impeachment psychodramas, both short-term and long-term?

Short-term, Trump may lose traction due to the media frenzy. He lost some of his ongoing momentum that had recently seen his polls steadily creeping up. He gave a fine speech at the United Nations and sounded presidential in his talks with foreign leaders—all overshadowed or now forgotten due to the impeachment psychodrama.

Trump’s critics have become emboldened, Left and Right. The Drudge Report has flip-flopped and is as anti-Trump as Vox or Slate. Many at National Review call for or anticipate impeachment without much regret. Likewise, some at Fox News—Shepard Smith, Andrew Napolitano, and Chris Wallace—are nonstop critics of Trump and hardly disguise their contempt.

The leftist media is on uppers, and completely ecstatic in moth-to-flame fashion, as if it were May 2017 again and Trump’s demise was a day away.

Because Joe Biden faces far more legal exposure than Trump, he is mentioned (if even to contextualize and exonerate him) in every news account of Ukraine. Whether or not Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) or her erstwhile henchwoman, Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), was behind this gambit, does not matter. (Nothing much from either one had worked to slow down Biden in the last six months). Biden is simply not physically or mentally up to a year of cross-examination. And Hunter Biden is more unsteady than Joe and will thus be hard to locate.

We are starting to see the outlines of a progressive fantasy on the horizon: Biden will be sacrificed. The party will unite around Warren. The left-wing media narrative will be, “We took out one of our own, now it is your turn to depose Trump.” Chaos overload for two or three weeks might keep Trump’s polling low.

Long-term, however, Trump wins.

We still have a number of government audits coming from Michael Horowitz, John Durham, and John Huber—and the targets are not Trump. The Senate will not convict the president under any foreseeable circumstances. The full story of the whistleblower has not been told, but there are a lot of narratives to come about the sudden rules allowing hearsay, DNC involvement, and who knew far in advance about the complainant’s writ. Once the Democratic debates continue, the candidates’ screaming and hysterics return, and the impeachment hearings descend into a Kavanaugh-esque farce, the public will begin to get scared again by the Left’s shrieking Jacobins. Schiff’s “parody” is a small foretaste of what’s to come. Voters soon will surmise that the only thing between their 401k plans and socialism is Donald J. Trump.

Warren or her possible facsimile is a weaker candidate than even the enfeebled Biden. Her lack of viability will be of enormous advantage in NeverHillary-fashion to Trump. His fundraising, already ascendant, will hit the stratosphere. The idea that the new and old NeverTrumpers will be on the side of socialism will finally discredit them. Wall Street and Silicon Valley will keep trashing Trump, but privately write checks to stop Warren’s wealth tax that would be only the beginning of her Venezuelization of America.

So if Trump’s health holds out, if we don’t have a recession, if there is not an optional war, and Trump endures the next few weeks of 360-degree, 24/7 targeting, 2020 will be far more favorable than ever imaginable for him.

 

Originally posted 2019-10-06 09:31:20.

Are you a USAA Member?

I just sent the following message to my once-favorite American Corporation. I have my principles as I thought they did as well. Who knows what’s next – press one for English?

 

This message is meant for Mr. Stuart Parker, our CEO, and I will recognize a reply from no one except him for I believe I deserve no less. I have been a loyal member of USAA since 1974 when I, as a SNCO became eligible to join. I always considered USAA to be the MOST respected company in America, and during my thirty-six years as a Marine have probably been responsible for 100’s of Marines and sailors joining our organization. You are my bank, my investment broker, and my insurer. My five children are USAA members, as are my nine grandchildren. However, I have reached a point where I am seriously considering going back to Navy Federal for banking and mortgage help, to another brokerage house for my investment, and back to Geico for insurance.

Why? This morning I was attempting to find FOX News and happen to mistakenly click on CNN and found myself in the middle of an ad from USAA. Imagine my dismay that my once admired and highly respected company would spend “our” funds to advertise on such a biased and unethical organization that has been caught violating ethical standards and rules by their employees, e.g., leaking debate questions to a candidate. I watch FOX because, in my opinion; they are the “least” biased of all the TV news outlets. Obviously, you are free to advertise where you feel USAA will get its best bang for the least buck, but I would also expect you to consider the fallout for your choices as well. This missive will appear on my social media sources and my blog as well. I have a tough decision ahead of me now. Sign me as a highly disgruntled long-time member

Jim Bathurst 

PS If I get a reply from the “correct” person, I promise to post it as a follow-up. Should prove interesting.

Originally posted 2017-02-11 11:46:50.

Drug Addicts Need Help

And here comes Joey to the rescue. Ha!

Folks, is there any end to the idiotic, lame brain, destructive, life threatening ideas that come from the swamp? I think not. Some of you who watch the news have probably already seen this, but I know there are a lot folks on here who, like me, do not watch any of the MSM  propaganda programs, and yes that even includes FOX. But I have some Marine and Navy brothers who insist on trying to raise my blood pressure and send me what they think I should know. about; really? LOL

I can’t imagine what this act by Joey, and his gang of thugs is supposed to do. I must simply be a right wing, conservative dummy. If any of you can explain in Grunt terms what this idea is supposed to do for racial equality, please enlighten me. Thank you.

Be sure to click on the link at the bottom and watch the short video as Leo points out some thing I hope you all know. One of the most important elections in your town is for the members of the school board. I totally agree! The sad thing is those running are not required to reveal what side of the aisle they are on. It is supposed to be a bi-partisan, non-political election for those seats. That is, in and of itself, a joke! You can bet your bippee I will know who is who when I vote for board members

Leo Terrell hammers Biden admin plan to distribute ‘smoking kits’: ‘How does this achieve racial equality?’

Fox News contributor Leo Terrell on Tuesday blasted the White House over a reported plan to give out “smoking kits” in poor communities in the name of racial equity and reducing harm.

“I want to be very clear. They are using the term racial equity. Racial equity is a code for affirmative action, low expectations. You’re basically having a government involved in distributing equipment, pipes to help encourage drug use in minority communities. How does that achieve racial equality?” Terrell told “Fox & Friends.”

The Biden administration is set to fund the distribution of “smoking kits and supplies” as part of a $30 million grant program aimed at reducing drug-related infections, according to the Washington Free Beacon.

An HHS spokesman told the Free Beacon the kits contain pipes for users to smoke crack cocaine, crystal methamphetamine, and “any illicit substance” and that the grants will be targeted to underserved communities to advance racial equity.

Leo Terrell hammers Biden admin plan to distribute ‘smoking kits’_ ‘How does this achieve racial equality_’ _ Fox News

 

Amazing! Thirty billion dollars of tax payer money will supply the drug afflicted folks in the poorer neighborhoods with pipes. Why? Because they can’t afford them? WOW! I wonder who the grant is going to and will be responsible for where they are distributed?