Category: Posted Links 1

(DCNF)—The audience at a Tuesday event laughed when former Republican Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey appeared to joke about wishing for a “death match” between former President Donald Trump and former Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy.

Christie drew vocal disapproval from audiences for criticizing former President Donald Trump on multiple occasions after announcing his presidential campaign on June 6, 2023. Christie, who criticized Trump for criticizing some of the officials who previously served in his administration, was discussing his thoughts on his opponents in the Republican presidential primary at a University of Chicago event titled “Does the Truth Still Matter? A Conversation With Chris Christie.”

“I would have preferred any of those people over Trump,” Christie told the audience. “Ramaswamy and Trump, I would have hoped for a death match where they both die.”

Chris Christie: "I would have preferred any of those people over Trump. Ramaswamy and Trump I would have hoped for a death match. Where they both die."
The applause break from the 'progressive crowd' was a nice touch of irony. pic.twitter.com/gkijE5ER54

— Eric Abbenante (@EricAbbenante) April 24, 2024

The audience laughed at the joke, when the moderator asked Christie if he meant “a literal death match.”

“Yes,” Christie responded, “Where they both die.”

Christie attacked Trump in a July 2023 CNN appearance for calling special counsel Jack Smith a “crackhead.”

“This is just what makes Donald Trump an unacceptable nominee for our party, because he says things like this without any regard for truth or falsity, without any regard for the propriety of it,” Christie told CNN host Jake Tapper. “But even worse yet, what does that do to help anyone other than him? My argument all along has been, this race in 2024 for Donald Trump, is all about Donald Trump, it’s not about the American people. He doesn’t give a damn about the American people.”

Christie, Trump and Ramaswamy did not immediately respond to requests for comment from the Daily Caller News Foundation.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

(DCNF)—A watchdog group filed a lawsuit against the Air Force on Wednesday for allegedly withholding records shedding light on the service’s efforts to set racial diversity quotas when taking on new officers, the Daily Caller News Foundation has learned.

Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr., then Air Force’s top officer, updated demographic goals for applicants to become officers in the Air Force in an August 2022 memo, calling the effort “aspirational.” The Center to Advance Security in America (CASA), a watchdog group focused on security and civil liberties, requested communications related to the memo using a federal transparency law the following year, and when the Air Force said it couldn’t find anything, CASA decided to sue, according to a copy of the filing obtained by the DCNF in advance.

CASA appealed the denial in October, arguing it “cannot be accurate” the Air Force was unable to produce any responsive records to the request, the appeal letter states. The explanation contained in the denial did not even address major components of the FOIA request. The Air Force has not responded to the appeal, CASA said.

CASA reasons that Brown’s August 2022 memo “undoubtedly” triggered internal discussions among staff, according to the letter. Further, since the request included some of the same language in the memo that was emailed out to staff, it’s almost “impossible” that AETC was unable to find any communications matching the request.

The watchdog “lost hope” the Air Force would comply with the records request without involving the court, CASA Director James Fitzpatrick told the DCNF.

In the memo, Brown, who now serves as the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and other Air Force chiefs directed Air Education and Training Command (AETC) — the component that oversees pilot training — and the U.S. Air Force Academy (USAFA) to “develop a diversity and inclusion outreach plan aimed at achieving these goals no later than 30 September 2022.” The organizations were to report their progress on a yearly basis, including detailed description of measures enacted to increase applicant pool diversity.

“Many Americans interpret directives such as this as appearing to be in violation of federal discrimination laws and prioritizing race over merit in the recruitment of future officers in our nation’s armed forces. This raises questions about the dedication of scarce resources to politically charged issues and the impact on military preparedness and operations,” CASA wrote in the initial Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, addressed to AETC.

But, the Air Force said it was unable to find any emails or communications among key officials containing terms like “Officer Source of Commission Applicant Pool Goals,” “DEI,” “race,” “African-American” and more, CASA said in the appeal.

CASA also asked for copies communications between Brown, Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall, now-Chief of Staff Gen. David Allvin and about 15 other officials on the issue, the letter states. The Air Force did not explain its rationale for denying that element of the request, according to the watchdog.

“CASA will continue to push for more records and information related to this unprecedented push by the U.S. Air Force to develop racial quotas for Officers and Airmen in violation of federal nondiscrimination law,” Fitzpatrick told the DCNF.

The memo set an objective to increase the percentage of non-white Americans in the applicant pool as the service focuses attention on perceived racial and gender disparities at the higher ranks. Women and racial-ethnic minority groups were often underrepresented in terms of accessions, retention and career and promotion opportunities, Air Force reviews, conducted in 2020 and 2021, found.

Brown said the numbers were derived from the actual demographic makeup of the U.S. as a whole and only impacted applicants, not those who actually make it into the Air Force officer corps at a hearing in July.

“There’s a goal to allow those people to understand what the opportunities are, but to be selected [for opportunities], it’s merit-based. If we don’t outreach to them we may miss tremendous talent, but they’ve got to be qualified,” Brown told the Senate Armed Services Committee.

AETC did not immediately respond to the DCNF’s request for comment.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

(DCNF)—National Public Radio’s (NPR) new CEO Katherine Maher attempted to defend herself following backlash for her past remarks concerning the First Amendment in an interview published by The Wall Street Journal Wednesday.

Maher, who became CEO in March, has come under fire for posting her support for Biden’s 2020 campaign on Twitter in November of that year, as well as a video from 2021 where she said the First Amendment poses obstacles to countering “bad information.” Maher insisted in the WSJ interview that she possesses a “robust belief in the First Amendment” and that she was sharing “nuanced” views in the resurfaced video while accusing critics of taking her remarks out of context as a manipulation tactic.

EXCLUSIVE: Katherine Maher says the "the number one challenge" in her fight against disinformation is "the First Amendment in the United States," which makes it "a little bit tricky" to censor "bad information" and "the influence peddlers" who spread it.

NPR's censor-in-chief. pic.twitter.com/0vY6hIpbmO

— Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) April 17, 2024

Maher told the WSJ she was referring to the “landscape of constitutional protections and why that limits options of policymakers taking on certain issues” during the WSJ interview, adding, “It is by no means a personal perspective; it’s a very bad faith distortion of a nuanced perspective on a policy landscape issue.”

Social media platforms should have First Amendment rights, but “it also means it’s a little bit of a tricky road to be able to really address some of the real challenges of where does bad information come from,” Maher was saying in the 2021 interview, she told the WSJ.

Maher also gave a TED Talk in 2022 that resurfaced recently where she asserted “our reverence for the truth might be a distraction that’s getting in the way of finding common ground and getting things done.”

Maher similarly said the pushback about her views is distracting in the WSJ interview.

“All of this frankly is a bit of a distraction relative to the transformation our organization needs to undergo in order to best serve our mandate,” she told the WSJ.

Editor Uri Berliner worked at NPR for 25 years and accused the outlet in a recent essay of seeking to take down Trump during his presidential term by citing Russia-collusion allegations that subsequently were debunked. The outlet suspended Berliner without pay for five days beginning on Friday, and he ended up resigning.

“I cannot work in a newsroom where I am disparaged by a new CEO whose divisive views confirm the very problems at NPR that I cite in my Free Press essay,” Berliner wrote in his resignation letter.

Maher also called former President Donald Trump “racist” in 2018 on Twitter, according to The New York Times.

NPR did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

(DCNF)—Democratic megadonor Reid Hoffman is bankrolling a new super PAC tasked with combating the potential threat of independent Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s candidacy on President Joe Biden’s reelection bid, the latest campaign filings show.

Hoffman was one of only two contributors listed in the Clear Choice PAC’s first quarter filing, with the LinkedIn co-founder giving the group a $125,000 donation on March 21, according to Federal Election Commission (FEC) data. The super PAC, which formed in early February, is one of many Democratic-aligned groups hoping to stop Kennedy from spoiling the 2024 election, other independent and third-party candidates.

The super PAC has totaled $375,000 in contributions — $250,000 being from SV Angel founder and managing partner Ronald Conway — and disbursed $34,075 to digital media firm Gambit Strategies, according to FEC data. Clear Choice PAC entered the second fundraising quarter with $340,924 cash on hand.

Kennedy’s campaign announced on Thursday that it had secured ballot access in the battleground state of Michigan via the Natural Law Party’s nomination, which the Daily Caller News Foundation confirmed with the secretary of state’s office.

Clear Choice PAC has hired elections lawyer and former Michigan Democratic Party Chairman Mark Brewer to challenge the independent’s position on the ballot, according to The Detroit News.

Hoffman has drawn speculation for his past connection with Jeffrey Epstein after a Wall Street Journal analysis showed his plans to visit the pedophile’s private island, Little St. James, twice in 2014. The megadonor told the outlet he had visited the island once for a fundraising trip, but hadn’t interacted with Epstein since 2015.

Clear Choice PAC was founded by former Biden deputy campaign manager, Pete Kavanaugh, according to The Washington Post. Kavanaugh told the outlet that independent and third-party candidates don’t have “any chance of winning a state in November, never mind reaching 270 electoral votes.”

“They are spoilers, plain and simple,” said Kavanaugh. “We’re here to work with allies to ensure those candidates are held accountable, and everything is on the table.”

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) has formed its own group to combat independent and third-party candidates, as well as a coalition of lawyers to police candidates’ ballot access process. The DNC already took aim at Kennedy by filing a FEC complaint over an aligned super PAC — American Values 2024 — helping the independent gather ballot signatures.

Kennedy is also on the ballot in Utah, and has gathered the required signatures in North Carolina, New Hampshire, Nevada, Nebraska, Georgia, Arizona, South Carolina, Idaho, Iowa and Hawaii with help from the super PAC.

Other liberal outside groups are organizing similar campaigns against Kennedy and others, like Third Way, American Bridge, MoveOn, Citizens to Save Our Republic and End Citizens United, according to NBC News.

Kennedy’s campaign has brought in $11.2 million between Jan. 1 and March 31, and spent $10.6 million, according to FEC filings. The independent entered April with just over $6 million cash on hand.

The Kennedy campaign, Clear Choice PAC, Hoffman and Conway did not respond to the DCNF’s requests for comment.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

(ZeroHedge)—In a move aimed at Donald Trump, House Democrats have introduced a bill that would remove Secret Service protection for any former executive sentenced to prison for a federal or state felony.

The bill comes from Democratic Mississippi Rep. Bennie Thompson, who, in a fitting Deep State overlap, is not only the former Jan. 6 committee chairman but also the ranking member of the Homeland Security committee. Introduced Friday, HR 8081 has 8 cosponsors so far — all Democrats.

These days, nearly every bill comes with a goofy, forced acronym, and this one’s no exception. Thompson has titled it the “Denying Infinite Security and Government Resources Allocated toward Convicted and Extremely Dishonorable (DISGRACED) Former Protectees Act.”

The measure seeks to address an admittedly huge conundrum that would arise in the event Trump gets jail time for any of the various politically-motivated prosecutions he’s facing around the country: How would Secret Service agents operate inside a prison?

If Thompson’s bill became law, they simply wouldn’t. That would make possible Democrats’ fever dreams of Prisoner Trump getting shivved in a prison shower, and negate their dread that a judge might choose to sentence Trump to house arrest out of mere practicality.

As Homeland Security committee Democrats wrote in a fact sheet describing the bill:

“This bill would remove the potential for conflicting lines of authority within prisons and allow judges to weigh the sentencing of individuals without having to factor in the logistical concerns of convicts with Secret Service protection.”

Trump is currently facing four prosecutions:

• The scandal-plagued Georgia election interference case led by DA Fanni Willis, who was having an affair with one of her prosecutors
• A federal election interference case
• Federal charges of mishandling classified documents
• The underway New York hush money trial, which centers on alleged falsification of business records regarding payments to compensate porn actress Stormy Daniels for keeping quiet about her alleged affair with Trump

“It is regrettable that it has come to this, but this previously unthought-of scenario could become our reality,” said Thompson — as if he and his comrades don’t want that reality more than anything on Earth.

(The Epoch Times)—The IRS announcement that it will soon be deploying artificial intelligence (AI) software to enforce the U.S. tax code has raised concerns among cyber experts that without proper oversight, the new technology could be weaponized against conservative groups.

In remarks made April 17 at the UiPath on Tour: Public Sector event in Washington, IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel announced the agency would be utilizing the tools to better assist IRS agents in identifying potential tax cheats.

“Right now, I believe that there are AI solutions that we have not yet leveraged that exist today that can help with some of these basic questions to the benefit of taxpayers,” Mr. Werfel said. “And on the other side of the equation, we are using AI today to do even more to unlock and spot this complexity.”

The government’s implementation of the growing technology will be instrumental in helping the agency uncover the most elaborate tax schemes, according to Mr. Werfel.

“I also think of a chess analogy to where we are going to be assessing some of the complexity of how money is moved across different subsidiaries, into tax shelters and holding companies,” Mr. Werfel said. “Sometimes [it’s] done completely legally, and sometimes, unfortunately, it’s done illegally.”

“A human makes the decision, ultimately, when we do these types of efforts on the enforcement side, but we want the computer essentially helping us be a better chess player,” he added.

However, tech expert Jake Denton, a research associate at The Heritage Foundation’s Tech Policy Center, told The Epoch Times that taxpayers should be skeptical of how the agency will use the technology.

“This technology really gives the IRS a shield to bulk flag anyone it finds problematic, which is very troubling,” said Mr. Denton. “It is encouraged under this model to use broad strokes to identify individuals and can then, if asked, lean into the supposedly all knowing AI model under the claim that it is proprietary, and therefore, escape any potential accountability.

“The effect of this can be absolutely devastating because essentially the IRS could weaponize it, and no one would have any idea,” he added.

Previous Discrimination Against Conservatives

In 2017, the IRS was forced to express “its sincere apology” after it was discovered that the agency had targeted conservative organizations, including Linchpins of Liberty—along with 40 other conservative groups—in their applications for tax-exempt status. Later that year the Department of Justice would go on to settle a class action suit that included 428 members who alleged they were victims of political discrimination by authorities within the IRS.
In a statement announcing the settlement, former Attorney General Jeff Sessions said that the agency had betrayed the public trust.

“Chief Justice John Marshall wrote ’that the power to tax involves the power to destroy … [is] not to be denied.‘ And it should also be without question that our First Amendment prohibits the federal government from treating groups differently based solely on their viewpoint or ideology,” said Mr. Sessions. “But it is now clear that during the last Administration, the IRS began using inappropriate criteria to screen applications for 501(c) status. These criteria included names such as ’Tea Party,‘ ’Patriots,‘ or ’9/12‘ or policy positions concerning government spending or taxes, education of the public to ’make America a better place to live,’ or statements criticizing how the country was being run. It is also clear these criteria disproportionately impacted conservative groups.

“As a result of these criteria, the IRS transferred hundreds of applications to a specifically designated group of IRS agents for additional levels of review, questioning and delay. In many instances, the IRS then requested highly sensitive information from applicants, such as donor information, that was not needed to make a determination of tax-exempt status.

“The IRS’s use of these criteria as a basis for heightened scrutiny was wrong and should never have occurred. It is improper for the IRS to single out groups for different treatment based on their names or ideological positions. Any entitlement to tax exemption should be based on the activities of the organization and whether they fulfill requirements of the law, not the policy positions adopted by members or the name chosen to reflect those views.”

AI Must Be Open Source

Despite the abuse of power, in 2022, the Democrats’ Inflation Reduction Act rewarded the IRS with a large cash infusion, delivering nearly $80 billion, a portion of which has been earmarked for the creation and implementation of the new technology.

Mr. Denton warns that the new AI technology gives the agency a significantly more powerful tool to covertly discriminate against certain groups than anything that could have been imagined in 2017.

“This kind of AI integration is perfect to cultivate the kind of discriminatory corruption people are most concerned about,” said Mr. Denton. “AI would allow bad actors within the agency to use the technology to target certain groups and now there would be nothing that the individual could do to contest the models since the process would have been automated away to an unexplainable black box.”

“In the old model you could at least bring forward the person who flagged you and at least have the right to challenge your accuser,” he added.

Any hopes of reigning in the powerful technology and averting potential abuse will be contingent on the public’s demand for transparency, according to Mr. Denton.

“We don’t want to block the IRS from acquiring AI,” said Mr. Denton. “The best thing would be to optimize the IRS completely away. But the answer requires a certain amount of transparency. If they are going to bring in the model it has to be open sourced, and explainable.”

“We can set these kinds of guidelines before it is fully adopted and given its history, shouldn’t accept anything less,” he added.