The Fifth Circuit’s OSHA Vaccine Mandate Stay + A Wrinkle

This evening, a panel of the Fifth Circuit—after an expedited briefing schedule—reaffirmed its initial stay in BST Holdings, L.L.C. v. OSHA, No. 21-60845.    

This stay stops OSHA from taking any action to enforce the mandate while the court considers the petitioners’ request for a permanent injunction against the mandate. A court’s decision to grant a stay pending briefing on the merits of an injunction is always important. It is very likely a preview of the final outcome of the case, because to determine whether or not to grant the stay in the first place, the court considers four factors, the first of which is likelihood of success on the merits. In this case, Judge Engelhardt, writing for a unanimous panel, said that the petitioners are, “for a multitude of reasons,” likely to succeed on the merits. 

In its emergency stay last week, the panel said there was reason to believe the mandate suffers from grave statutory and constitutional issues, and tonight the panel fleshed out both those points.

On the statutory front, the panel noted that this a rare government action where the rule is both over inclusive (blanket approach that does not take into account varying types of businesses and the attendant COVID risks) and underinclusive (100 is an arbitrary number to address an alleged “grave danger”).

As I have discussed on Instagram before, OSHA issued this rule under its emergency authority, and it must meet an exacting statutory standard to do so. The court analyzed the ways in which this rule fails to meet the standard. I will link to the full opinion for those who want to get in the weeds. Suffice to say, the opinion makes clear the rule is riddled with problems.

The court’s analysis of the statutory flaws is satisfying from a legal perspective, but the court’s gripe with the more fundamental constitutional infirmities presents a restatement of critical constitutional principles at a time when the sand is shifting under the very foundations of our republic. 

The court said that the mandate “likely exceeds the federal government’s authority under the Commerce Clause because it regulates noneconomic inactivity that falls squarely within the States’ police power,” and second, “separation of powers principles cast doubt over the Mandate’s assertion of virtually unlimited power to control individual conduct under the guise of a workplace regulation.” 

I talked a little about the state police power versus federal government authority in this post on The Federalisttoward the beginning of the pandemic. Maintaining the balance between the federal government and the states is critical right now as the Left attempts to consolidate power.  The states cannot cede an inch to the federal government and must, to the best of their ability, apply pressure in return. It is heartening to see a federal court defend these constitutional principles, and I hope that the grassroots takes heart at this and continues to protect and defend these principles in whatever way we can, too.   

The court breezed through the remaining factors, finding that the petitioners would suffer serious harm absent a stay, that the respondents will suffer no harm by a stay, and finally that the stay is in the public interest. This last bit had perhaps my favorite part of the opinion: 

The public interest is also served by maintaining our constitutional structure and maintaining the liberty of individuals to make intensely personal decisions according to their own convictions—even, or perhaps particularly, when those decisions frustrate government officials.

That’s really a central element to this vaccine debate. There is a large group of people in power (BigTech, etc) and government who think that they can tell other people what to do. But the Constitution is the controlling document of a counter-majoritarian form of self-government—a form of government that seeks to defend the dissenter against the mob.  Thank God the Fifth Circuit is articulating that. We all have to take up the chorus. 

Where we go from here is a little less clear to me. Normally, it would proceed to the merits, but looming in the background (or the forefront, I suppose) of this litigation is the multi-circuit lottery. The federal rules provide that in this type of challenge to an agency rule and when multiple circuits are fielding challenges, the challenge shall be assigned to a single circuit at random. This is stressful because some circuits are better for us than others. I can tell you there are a lot of federal judges out there who are comfortable with a vaccine mandate and would find their way to upholding this terrible rule if given the opportunity. 

We shall see…  

You can read the opinion here and track all the filings at Liberty Justice Center’s website here. I will update on any major developments here and on social media. 

The Federalist/Pretending COVID Is An Emergency Is Killing America

Published here at The Federalist on August 30, 2021

The entire Western world is living a massive COVID lie. That lie is strangling the life out of liberty, and it will destroy our constitutional order entirely if we do not end this horrifying charade. A recent article in The Guardian discussing France’s vaccine passport unconsciously provides the perfect example.  It describes the Great Plague that struck Marseille in 1720 (the final contortion of the Black Death), noting that it “kill[ed] more than half of the city’s population.”  “[S]truggl[ing] to find a delicate balance between halting the spread of the disease and damaging vital commerce,” the city authorities, The Guardian tells us, ordered travelers “to carry a ‘bill of health’ and ships arriving at the Mediterranean port underwent a 40-day cordon sanitaire or quarantine.” “Three hundred years on,” The Guardian seriously intones, “President Emmanuel Macron is walking an equally tricky tightrope . . .” Hopefully, you already spotted the glaring problem with this comparison. In 1720, the Great Plague in Marseille killed more than half the city’s population.   

We have gotten to the point in this “pandemic” where government leaders and a worryingly high percentage of the American people are acting like COVID is a crisis on par with Marseille’s Great Plague. We have been buried in facts, figures, mountains of data, constantly shifting information, misinformation, and more. We are relentlessly briefed by the media about rising infection rates or the current capacity of local ICUs.

But cut through it all and ask—how many Americans are dying? According to Johns Hopkins, the fatality rate of COVID in the United States is 1.7%, which means that 98.3% survive. That takes into account all deaths, including people who had underlying conditions and the elderly. Excluding those who are obviously high-risk, the survival rate is close to 100%. If COVID ever were an emergency, it is no longer one now, and it has not been for a long time. It is a nasty disease, to be sure, but it is one that we are going to have to live with and learn to treat. Instead, we have all assumed roles in a live rendition of Hans Christian Andersen’s folktale The Emperor’s New Clothes: The government plays the lying emperor, whose hubris resulted in his parading naked in public, all the while declaring that he wore clothes.  The American people play the silly subjects who disregarded reality to humor the monarch’s farce.

If we do not say the truth and end this false emergency, we will lose our liberty forever. In March of 2020, we foolishly locked down and ceded our constitutional system of government (three independent branches with checks and balances) for rule by the executive. The executives and attendant bureaucrats assumed the powers of the legislature, issuing lockdown orders, mask mandates, and now vaccine passports. Many courts have all but rubber-stamped their actions. James Madison straightforwardly warned in Federalist 47, “[t]he accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive and judicia[l], in the same hands . . . may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” In short, we have been living under intolerable and unjustified tyranny for close to a year and a half. 

Despite the reality, our governing class is using the pretense of an ongoing crisis (on par with the final onslaught of the bubonic plague, apparently) to maintain and exercise power outside the American constitutional order.  They have taken from us our most precious gift as Americans—our unique form of government that assures our liberty. Just as shocking, countless underinformed and careless Americans, either from ignorance or fear, see no issue with the current extra-constitutional arrangement. They berate us to “trust the [ever-changing and politicized] science,” but the death rate tells the tale. We must restore the proper allocation of power, or we will lose our freedom forever. 

It is imperative that any state or jurisdiction still operating under emergency authority terminate that state of emergency immediately. According to, over half of the fifty states remain under emergency orders and executive rule. Even in some states, like New York, that have ended their statewide emergency orders, large jurisdictions remain in states of emergency, continuing to abuse American citizens’ freedom (e.g., New York City and its vaccine-passport program). State legislatures should pass laws that forbid any business or government entity from mandating masks; vaccine passports must be absolutely forbidden. The Alabama legislature already passed a law banning COVID vaccine passports, and North Dakota also enacted legislation that would largely block businesses from requiring proof of vaccination. Your state legislatures have enormous power in our constitutional system, power that we the people have ignored for too long. It is high time to activate grassroots influence and self-govern via our legislatures.

COVID is not an emergency. People are not dying in droves. There is no justification for the continued suspension of the American form of self-government that secures all our individual rights and liberties.  In The Emperor’s New Clothes, it was the honesty of a child that finally exposed the emperor and the people for fools when he cried out, “but he hasn’t got anything on!” It is long past time to speak the truth: there is no true COVID emergency. Enough is enough. Return America to its proper constitutional order and insist on consent of the governed.

Mandated Vaccine to Fly?

The Epoch Times ran this op-ed on November 30, 2020: ‘Common Pass’ May Open the Door to Loss of Freedom.

Last month, United Airlines tested “[t]he first transatlantic trial of Common Pass, an app that creates a standard digital format for COVID-19 test results.”  Common Pass has been developed by the Commons Project and the World Economic Forum, and the hope is that it will both facilitate travel across borders and provide confidence to passengers that it is safe to fly again. The pass right now reports on a traveler’s COVID test status, but it could easily transition to track vaccination status, and indeed the industry expects it to do just that. The acceptance of these types of apps as a condition to travel is a very slippery slope and they should not be permitted for domestic flights. 

American Mind/Big Tech Imposes European-Style Law in American Jurisdictions, Challenging the Longevity of the First Amendment

My piece below was published by the American Mind on November 29, 2020.

Big Tech has infiltrated the American homeland and is imposing speech laws that resemble those of Europe, challenging the authority and longevity of the First Amendment. Although we share common ideals with other Western nations, we pursue and defend those ideals very differently. Nowhere is this more apparent than in our approach to speech.

It is important to understand how fundamentally different our country is from the rest of the world if we want to understand why Big Tech’s speech codes should not be inflicted on American citizens in American jurisdictions. Put another way, if the would-be monarchs of Silicon Valley get their way, their speech codes will ultimately undermine our American values of free speech and the First Amendment itself.  

The rest of this article is available at The American Mind here.

My Statement on the Conclusion of the Flynn Case & Why I Will Be Stepping Back From Politics for a Time

On November 25, 2020, President Trump issued a full pardon to Michael Flynn. I am thrilled for the Flynns, who are finally free from the nightmare of a government gone rogue and the clutches of a politically motivated court. General Flynn was innocent all along; the government acknowledged it had no case in May; and the fact that the President had to issue a pardon to put an end to the ongoing charade should act as a warning to all Americans that our justice system is in crisis. But today, I want to express my gratitude for being part of the Flynn case and explain why I will be stepping away from political activity, commentary, and analysis for the next nine months.  

The American Mind/Mr. President, Attack.

Published at The American Mind on November 11, 2020.

Does Trump still have a chance? That’s the question that flooded my inbox Saturday after the media called the election for Biden. If there was massive voter fraud, as some Republicans have alleged, Trump absolutely has a path. But only aggressive action on the part of the president and unwavering determination from his supporters will make that path navigable.

Many pro-Trump, nationalist Republicans are confident that Trump has a path because they believe that the Democrats committed fraud and that Trump will prevail in the courts on that basis. Many people have analyzed the election and concluded that the Democrats committed both electronic and manual fraud. They think the turnout was more than the Democrats had planned for, and Trump support was high in demographics they didn’t anticipate. Many who have analyzed the statistics think that this forced the Democrats’ hand and they had to cheat more than they had bargained for, which in turn created both statistical anomalies and even impossibilities in some precincts. I myself have reviewed statistics reports that identify mathematically suspicious counties in swing states.

When all the litigation is said and done, Pennsylvania is almost certainly going to resolve for Trump. Arizona and Georgia, both within reach for the president, are incredibly tight. There will be recounts and lawsuits that determine into which column they ultimately land, and the hope is justice will prevail in every courtroom and case. But courts are uncertain battlegrounds, and judges alarmingly fickle.

The American people who believe that something is not right can help by vociferously demanding election integrity and accountability. The media and the Democrats rushed to proclaim Biden the winner to shift the mood of the country and settle the issue. They did it to cast Biden as the legitimate winner and frame challenges from Trump as despotic resistance or even a coup.

This mood will affect the judiciary. Courts are wary of invalidating votes in the best of times. Judges are people, too. It will be hard to hand down rulings that could result in Trump’s win and, perhaps even more daunting, the shockwaves across the country and the world that would follow. The Trump lawyers will need traction in the courts to win early steps that give them discovery. A national mood demanding answers will make it easier for judges to countenance all these varied suits. So, Americans who want to do something should speak up now, support the president, and demand election integrity.

At the end of the day, though, the only one who can settle this is the president himself. Donald Trump needs to do what he does best, what he did to win in 2016, and what made him such a successful President—he needs to do the unpredictable, the unorthodox, and the aggressive. If the statisticians are right and we are staring in the face of massive election fraud, he needs to attack on every possible front and he needs to do it now. He should launch the necessary suits or investigations that permit him to subpoena election workers; he needs to audit the counties where statisticians have identified suspicious anomalies; he needs a forensics team to examine the code; he needs an investigation of Dominion Voting Systems.

When the Democrats lost in 2016, they launched a two-year investigation into “Russian collusion” that consumed tens of millions of taxpayer dollars, diluted the Trump administration’s focus and energy, and ended in Robert Mueller’s conclusion that there was no collusion between Trump and the Russians. An allegation of an internal, rigged election is far more serious. If true, the foundation of the American Republic has been corrupted and our fundamental right to self-determination and self-government stolen from us. This allegation warrants even more than the onslaught the Democrats unleashed in 2016. If everything is aboveboard, these aggressive efforts will turn up nothing, thus re-establishing trust in our system for 71 million Americans and indeed for many of our friends and allies abroad.

But, if there is fraud, Trump’s full-force assaults should find a weak spot. Breaking through that crack will reveal a scheme that will shock the world. Any other Republican candidate would concede at this juncture—intimidated by the force of the media, the exultant mood of the Left, and the inevitable assault they will unleash if the election swings back to the Right. But Trump is a new kind of Republican.

If the Democrats have indeed committed mass voter fraud, they are in quiet fear of their precarious position. They’ve overplayed their hand and all the president needs to do is attack. The path to victory for Trump himself, to finally exposing the expansive corruption of the Left, and to the restoration of our democratic republic, requires nerve no other politician possesses. If Trump decides to do what every other Republican would flinch from, the Democrats know he will blow their scheme wide open. In this pivotal hour, Donald Trump must not flinch.

Mr. President, sir, let’s finish this.

Photo: Flickr Gage Skidmore

This Is Why Trump Shouldn’t Concede – Hillary Said Not To!

Under no circumstances should Donald Trump concede. He shouldn’t concede because he has not lost yet. Hillary Clinton gave this advice to Joe Biden just before the election:

Hillary Clinton: “Under no circumstances should Joe Biden concede the election…because I think this is going to drag out and, eventually, I do believe he will win if we don’t give an inch, and if we are as focused and as relentless as the other side.” There you go. The Democrats and the media are screaming that Trump needs to concede, but in the reverse situation, they would be doing exactly what we are doing, and frankly, they would be more aggressive. Clinton says we are focused and relentless, but that is kind of laughable. Everyone knows that the old Republican Party is neither focused nor relentless; it caves to the Democrats every time, as you can see from the many prominent “Republicans” like George W. Bush and Mitt Romney who are out prematurely congratulating Biden for his media win. 

The Democratic Party beats up on the country club Republicans all the time, but it has never really gone to war with the Nationalist Republicans—with Trump’s MAGA Party. This is our first time the Democrat Party has met the new, Nationalist MAGA Republicans in a pitched battle. I don’t know if we will have the relentless focus to match the Democrats, but if we are going to win, we have to rise to the challenge. So, again my message is be aggressive. 

Let’s run through some other very pertinent stats. 

This was no blue wave. Even if we are not right, and there was no massive fraud (there was, but for the sake of argument) Donald Trump has garnered over 70 million votes right now. In 2016, he only got 62 million. Trump expanded his support from the American people by 8 million votes this year. His support among blacks, Cubans, Hispanics, LGBTQ…all are up this second election cycle. Contrast this to Barack Obama, who garnered 69 million votes when he won in 2008 and only 65 million in 2012. Obama’s support after four years trended down; Donald Trump’s support exploded up. 

But, the fraud is the issue. Democrats spend a lot of time talking about trusting science, so let’s trust some math. According to Richard Baris (@peoples_pundit on Twitter) “we are now approaching, and in some metros will exceed, turnout levels that are comparable to nations where mandatory voting is the law.” He pointed to a BBC article from 2016 titled Vote Rigging: How to Spot the Tell-Tale Signs which said, “You never get a 98% or 99% turnout in an honest election. You just don’t.” BBC said this level of turnout triggered a presumption of fraud. Furthermore, I’ve been watching the reports on the statistics coming in, both for the Trump Team and for Sidney. These are people doing practically round the clock work crunching numbers. The numbers are showing statistical impossibilities. I might get with Wilson and pull together some stats for a post, but it’s also being widely reported on conservative outlets.

The Democrats and the media are trying to engineer this election. Consider that Fox et al called Arizona and Georgia for Biden, where only about 10,000 – 15,000 votes separate the two candidates (and both states will be going to recounts), but the media refuses to call North Carolina for Trump, where the President is up by over 75,000 votes. Can you see how we are fighting media misinformation? It’s extraordinary. The Democrats and the media have made us into a banana republic. 

We aren’t going to give in. 70 million voters are energized and want answers. The Supreme Court said in Bush v. Gore, “the right to vote as the legislature has prescribed is fundamental; and one source of its fundamental nature lies in the equal weight accorded to each vote and the equal dignity owed to each voter.” The fundamental right to vote is on the line here. Can because if illegal votes are being counted, as we think they are, then our votes no longer carry equal weight. Every American deserves full and aggressive investigation.  

That’s it for now. The key here, though, is that Trump has not conceded because he has not lost yet. He is doing exactly what Hillary Clinton counseled Biden to do if Biden found himself in the same scenario, and we can still win this election. Don’t let the Democrats get away with this level of hypocrisy and don’t let them gaslight you into defeatism. We are marching. This is the moment we will find out the mettle of the MAGA movement. I believe we have the courage and the resolve to finally measure up to the Democrats. If we choose to, we can do it.   

Photo: Flickr Gage Skidmore

The Federalist/There Is No Going Back To ‘Normal’ After Trump; The Republican Party is Changed Forever

Published on The Federalist on October 28, 2020.

Trump is not a Republican.  He never was before, and he is not one now.  As the nation speeds toward November 3rd, Republicans have been all over the board with predictions on the outcome, but some prominent Republicans have been consistently negative about Trump’s prospects and even hopeful for his defeat. This month, Peggy Noonan penned an archetypal anti-Trump piece titled “Biden, Pence and the Wish for Normalcy.” Noonan mused almost longingly that America might be headed toward an unprecedented landslide in favor of Biden. She said that if this happens, one of the primary reasons will simply be “that [Biden] is normal…and people miss normal so much.”  Noonan, like many Republicans who don’t like Trump—both prominent and rank-and-file—wants to go back to normal. The reality is we are never going back to “normal.” The old Republican Party is dead. Trump made a new party, and that is the party of the future. 

In 2016, Trump hijacked the Republican Party. Although billed as Republican, the support propelling him to victory was a new configuration of the electorate. Many mainstream Republicans still don’t understand this, but no other Republican was going to win in 2016. Trump won because he was not actually a Republican.     

Both the Republican and the Democratic parties are in the midst of their own internal civil wars.  The extreme Left-wing of the Democratic party is hurtling toward socialism and the destruction of American values. The Left is shifting into a machine of destruction that isn’t just focused on our statues or the names of military bases, but on destroying the fundamental principles of our country. Indeed, the escalating rhetoric currently employed by the Left historically does not just silence dissent, it eventually seeks to eliminate the dissenters. America is in a struggle not just for its identity, but for its life.  

While the Left remakes itself, the Republican side of the aisle is in the midst of its own struggle. When Trump won the White House, the anti-Trumpers of the Republican Party pivoted on a dime.  For most, it wasn’t a unity move, it was a simple power play and it was survival. Trump won, so the GOP decided to ride that wave. They stacked the White House with their people, promoted mainstream Republicans toward Presidential appointments, and benefited as best they could from the electoral upset, but they never coalesced behind Trump or his new party’s plan for American renewal. Both the Never- and Reluctant-Trumpers are hell-bent on holding out until Trump is out of office to return to the “normal” times for which Noonan yearns. What all Republicans need to realize is the Republican Party—as it was—is dead.  Its leaders lost the GOP’s soul by following globalist policies and pursuing their own personal wealth at the expense of the American people. While those Republicans were busy chasing their own interests and melding into a single ruling elite in Washington, the country and indeed the world, changed. What has come to be in the stead of the GOP, and what will continue to develop, is a new party. Trump is not a fluke president, he unified a movement and formed a new party that will continue on, even after he leaves office. 

The makeup of Trump’s party is new. He didn’t win in 2016 only by motivating greater Republican turnout. Trump flipped voters; he pulled from across the aisle. This excerpt from a Wall Street Journal article provides a striking example: 

“What happened in 2016 is [Trump] got a great many people who had supported Barack Obama and Democrats in the past to vote for him,” Republican strategist Whit Ayres told me earlier this week by phone. “Trumbull County in northeast Ohio is my classic example. Obama beat [Mitt] Romney there by 22 percentage points. Trump beat [Hillary] Clinton there by seven—a 29-percentage-point turnaround. So it was far more changing the allegiance of existing voters rather than generating a substantial turnout of new voters.”

Making this even more clear, after one of his recent rallies in Florida, RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel reported that “31.8% [of attendees] were NOT Republicans. 16.3% were Democrat. 24.4% did not vote in 2016. 14.4% did not vote in the last 4 elections.”

Trump’s new party cuts across traditional party lines and draws from every socio-economic stratum in America. Although Trump’s base remains the strong conservatives who once vitalized the old Republican Party, he has attracted blue collar Democrats, immigrants, and minorities. What unites these people? What are the core values of this new Party of Trump?  

The “Make America Great Again” slogan excellently captures the spirit.  Trump’s party retains the core family values of the old GOP, but with an additional and robust focus on economic nationalism, strong sovereignty and national security, and smart foreign policy. The people in Trump’s party are risk takers and wealth builders, and they truly live the American ideals of independence and free thought. The Party of Trump is composed of people who want to survive and thrive on their own two feet. Trump’s “Promises Made, Promises Kept” theme is a direct repudiation of years of betrayal by Washington elites—years of big social and economic pledges from politicians on the campaign trail followed by inaction or even straightforward betrayal of those promises in D.C. So, the party of Trump is motivated by politicians who don’t just talk, and not even by those who take some action, but by those who actually deliver.  

The people who oppose Trump have something in common, as well. They are predominantly takers. They don’t build; instead, they want the safe route to success.  This type of person is found in every stratum of society, too. From politicians like Joe Biden and Mitt Romney, to the middle-class people with safe corporate jobs who have no skin in the game, to the poor who would rather get a hand-out than a hand up. 

The anti-Trumpers within the Republican Party are working hard against the President and his party. Just last week, the New York Times highlighted the organized elements of this insurgency in the article “The Crowded, Competitive World of Anti-Trump GOP Groups.” Leading the pack are The Lincoln Project (Rick Wilson and George Conway) and the Take Back Our Party Pac, run by Greg Schott, “who sold his business software company to Salesforce in 2018 for a reported $6.5 billion,” and has poured $1 million into targeted ads trying to convince soft-Republicans to vote against Trump. 

The type of Republican who does not believe in Trump does not understand how the world has changed and cannot face the crisis we are now in. They come in one of two flavors: the corrupt, self-interested and the weak. They either want politics to be normal again, because that is when they held power and made money, or they can’t stand up to the assault of the Left (they want to be perceived as having that most-prized virtue of the GOP: gravitas). Most importantly, whichever flavor a Never- or Reluctant-Trumper comes in, neither is a winner; they are both compromisers. They either compromise to advance their own interests at the expense of this country, or they compromise from weakness, flinching from the possibility they’ll be mocked and ridiculed the way Trump is. 

Four years ago, Trump understood something had to change in America, and today it is now clear we are in more of a battle than we ever imagined. The unfolding facts of the elite entrenched bureaucracy’s attempted coup and the radical resolve of the far Left to destroy our institutions, our history, and perhaps us, too, requires a new kind of Republican. Politicians today must be fighters. Although Trump is unique in his style, every politician who successfully follows after him in this new party will need to show Americans that he or she is willing to fight for the good of the nation with the same uncompromising and aggressive resolve. Politicians who can take on our new party’s platform will be winners in America. 

The old Republican Party is dead.  Americans have witnessed the corruption at home and understand the threats we face from abroad, and they see that politics has changed. We cannot go back to “normal” if we want to turn this ship around. Trump’s new party is comprised of people who still believe in the American dream for themselves and for each other, and who are ready to do the difficult work necessary to peacefully but decisively, and without apology or compromise, return this country to its founding principles.  Be wary of the negative assaults of otherwise “good” Republicans and don’t let them get you down.  When the chaos of this current realignment settles, it will be clear that they aren’t in our party. Their party failed America and the world; ours is going to lead America back to prosperity and encourage a global movement toward national sovereignty and freedom. 

Photo: White House Flickr

The Subtle Twists of the Mainstream Media that Rob Americans of Choice

The media lies to and manipulates the American people. In 2012, Jeffrey Goldberg wrote a piece in The New Yorker connecting Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda. That’s the same connection the Bush administration was using to argue for the Iraq War. Goldberg’s story was ultimately debunked—long after Americans had deliberated and the die had been cast. So, sometimes the media makes very big, false allegations. But the media is also always gently distorting the truth in day-to-day reporting, and thereby shaping national opinion based on falsehoods. The below snippet is from an article in The Daily Beast, and it is quintessential mainstream media reporting. In an article reporting on the ACB hearings, The Daily Beast said:

This was not an admission. Barrett was making a statement of fact, not expressing an opinion. Barrett made clear to Klobuchar how she defined “super-precedent” in the article. Here is the transcript of Barrett’s point:

The way that [super-precedent] used in the scholarship and the way that I was using it in the article that you’re reading from was to define cases that are so well-settled that no political actors and no people seriously push for their overruling. And I’m answering a lot of questions about Roe, which I think indicates that Roe doesn’t fall in that category. And scholars across the spectrum say that doesn’t mean that Roe should be overruled. But descriptively, it does mean that it’s not a case that everyone has accepted and doesn’t call for its overruling. 

All over mainstream media (e.g. The Washington Post), Barrett’s comments to Klobuchar have been framed as “an admission.” By leaving out the definition that clearly makes her point purely a descriptive one, the media is telling the public that Barrett confessed she is gunning for Roe. This type of subtle twisting is typical of the mainstream media. When every single issue has this type of distorted slant, it deforms our whole society in furtherance of an agenda. 

Remember Goldberg of the Iraq War debacle? He was the author of the anonymously-sourced Atlantic piece alleging Trump has disdain for the military. Every article you read from a mainstream source—whether it is on Trump, police brutality, foreign affairs/China, the Supreme Court—has these sleights of hand that warp the truth and deceive you.  It is ok for Americans to disagree, but Americans deserve the truth so they can freely make up their minds. If you are reasoning from falsehoods, your conclusion is not your own—it has been predetermined by someone else through the manipulation of the facts. Stop swallowing whole what your side of the aisle is telling you and start critically thinking for yourself. Do you hold your views because you reasoned to them from solid premises, or because you were deftly handled by media with an agenda?