Read it.

Some old favorites in this crowd.

Read it.

It is enough to know the Party Line. Discussion merely leads to ThoughtCrime.

Read it.

Although they themselves have benefited enormously from the rise of free markets, liberal protection of property rights, and the meritocratic ideal, many among our most well-heeled men and women, even in the United States, have developed a tendency to embrace policies and cultural norms that undermine their own status. This is made worse by their own imperious behavior, graphically revealed in the mortifying college admissions scandal in the United States, where the Hollywood and business elites cheated, bribed, and falsified records to get their own kids into elite colleges.

Read it.

In the West bank the Palestinian Fatah government is threatening to cause an economic catastrophe by refusing partial payments from Israel and donor nations unless everyone stops deducting the money Fatah spends on supporting and encouraging terrorist activity. This issue has become more of an issue since 2018 when Israel passed a law to deduct from the $130 million a month (it collects in taxes and fees for the Palestinians in the West Bank) the amount (over $20 million) Fatah pays out to Palestinian terrorists in prison or to their families for deceased terrorists. The U.S. had already enacted a similar law and was deducting a similar amount from the $300 million it currently gives to the West Bank Palestinians. Other foreign donors have taken similar measures.

Read it.

It’s striking how the word “blacklisting” has gone from in the 1970s being a terrible McCarthyite offense against freedom to something that corporations now proudly advertise that they do to show how wokely virtuous they are.

Read it.

On December 9 and 10, 2016, the New York Times and the Washington Post independently reported that anonymous senior intelligence officials had told them that, based on intercepted communications, the intelligence agencies agreed that Russia had hacked the Democratic National Committee to help Donald Trump win the election. Their evidence was the fact of their access to U.S communications intelligence. A flood of subsequent stories also cited allegations by “senior intelligence officials” that “intercepted communications” and “intercepted calls” showed that “members of Donald J. Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and other Trump associates had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials in the year before the election.”

Incontrovertibly, the officials who gave these stories to the Times and Post violated the Comint Statute, and are subject to the “10 and 10” for each count. There is no clearer instance of what the governing law is, of how it was violated, and of the punishment that this incurs.

An excellent question.