Three Things You Need to Know – February 6, 2018

The Dossier 'What If's'

The plotline reads crazier than a movie script. A possibly corrupted FBI director, biased agents manipulating investigations, partisan moles in the Justice Department, and the overall threat of hostile foreign intelligence services. Forget the movies, you’d never be able to dream this stuff up.

I wonder how those on the left would have reacted if everything I just described happened to Obama during his first election. Imagine for a second that a “dossier” describing domestic terrorist ties to Barack Obama leaked to the press. At first, most media outlets don’t want to touch it, but a lesser-known internet site pulls the trigger and opens the floodgates.

Leaks and damaging information begin to drop almost daily. CNN publishes a photograph with Obama and Louis Farrakhan, the New York Times reveals that Obama had ties to domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, Fox News plays sermons from Jeremiah Wright seemingly on repeat for a week straight. EVERYTHING appears to backup and corroborate the “dossier.”

A rumor begins to circulate that the FBI is surveilling the Obama campaign. HOW IN THE HELL DID THEY GET THE AUTHORIZATION FOR THAT?! MSNBC reports that the FBI director’s wife received a campaign donation from John McCain. Rachel Maddow claims that the FBI is partisan and compromised. Later we find out that two of the agents investigating Obama’s ties to Ayers and Farrakhan HATE Obama and really want to see a McCain presidency.

The pieces are starting to fall into place, but then the ultimate scandal drops. We find out that the “dossier” was actually opposition research paid for and directed by the RNC and McCain campaign. Not only that, but Bush appointees in the Justice Department are getting hand fed opposition research from family members that work at the firm that compiled the dossier. Those compromised members of the DoJ and the FBI used that information to obtain a FISA warrant to spy on members of the Obama campaign.

All of this is currently happening, but imagine if even a fraction - JUST A FRACTION - would have happened to Obama back in 2008. Democrats would have been out in the streets in force. It would have been mass chaos. But all of this actually COULD have happened. There was just enough evidence to look into Obama as Trump, but the media considered one beyond reproach. And the media wonders why no one trusts them anymore...

The Dow's Record Drop

Yesterday, the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 1,175 points. It was the largest single-day point drop on record. That performance came on the heels of the Dow falling 665.75 on Friday, which, when you round up is… 666. But don’t read anything into that.

Barely two weeks ago, the Dow peaked at 26,616. Then, between last Friday and yesterday, it lost over a month of gains. It’s the worst two days the Stock Market has seen in almost two years. However, the market is still up 26% in the last year. Typical annual growth is around 8%.

One director at a brokerage firm said, “This is the first time in a while I’d say it feels like borderline panic-type selling. We haven’t seen something like this since the Brexit vote.”

But a director at a different firm said, “The markets are just taking a bit of a breather, which I’d argue is somewhat healthy.”

So, which is it? Is this just a snowball, or is it the first snowball of an approaching avalanche?

Some bond investors are spooked about there being more inflation on the horizon than they originally forecasted. In its effort to slow down inflation, the Federal Reserve has caused a lot of problems in the past when it becomes overly jumpy and tweaks interest rates too much. Investors got nervous that the Fed might do its usual tinkering and make things worse.

A lot of this over the past couple days is psychology – the market has gone so high, people are worried that it doesn’t make sense for stocks and bonds to stay at the level they’re at, so they’re tapping the breaks. But what if the breaks are out and we’re headed downhill?

The government is borrowing more money than ever. Retirement funds are in crisis. Couple these conditions with the volatility in Europe as it deals with its own immigration issues and financial problems, and the world seems on the verge of a massive reset.

Fair Weather Babies

Climate change isn’t just bad for the environment, it’s bad for the womb.

Yesterday, the New York Times ran a story highlighting women who claim their decision to have children is directly influenced by climate change.

For example, Sara considered having another child, but that would mean moving to a bigger house that’s farther from her job. She is not sure she can justify the environmental impact of a larger home and a longer commute.

Allison is concerned about an apocalyptic future of extreme weather. “I don’t want to give birth to a kid wondering if it’s going to live in some kind of ‘Mad Max’ dystopia.”

Mariam shared her concern: “My instinct now is to shield my children from the horrors of the future by not bringing them to the world.”

Amanda actually decided to have more children because of climate change. Her reason? “Someday, my husband and I will be gone. If my daughter has to face the end of the world as we know it, I want her to have her brother there.”

So many women are bringing climate change into their reproduction decisions that the organization “Conceivable Future” was founded to help women make environmentally friendly reproductive decisions and navigate our doomed world.

To not bring a child into the world because you’re scared they’ll increase your carbon footprint or that they’ll live like moody drifters on a desert-like terrain is the very definition of insanity.

These women are deciding not to have children based on their fictional perception of their children’s quality of life.

The disgusting lie of an impending environmental wasteland and an overpopulated planet wasn’t true in the 1970’s and it isn’t true today.

In fact, the birthrate in the United States reached its lowest point in 2016 and the decline continues all around the world.

It’s almost criminal that these women are allowing 50-year-old unsubstantiated fears dictate whether or not they bring a human life into the world.

If these women want to be scared about something, they should be afraid of AI. Some report that artificial intelligence could wipe out the entire human race in 30 years.

We can only hope the robots replace this group first.

MORE 3 THINGS

In light of the national conversation surrounding the rights of free speech, religion and self-defense, Mercury One is thrilled to announce a brand new initiative launching this Father's Day weekend: a three-day museum exhibition in Dallas, Texas focused on the rights and responsibilities of American citizens.

This event seeks to answer three fundamental questions:

  1. As Americans, what responsibility do we shoulder when it comes to defending our rights?
  2. Do we as a nation still agree on the core principles and values laid out by our founding fathers?
  3. How can we move forward amidst uncertainty surrounding the intent of our founding ideals?

Attendees will be able to view historical artifacts and documents that reveal what has made America unique and the most innovative nation on earth. Here's a hint: it all goes back to the core principles and values this nation was founded on as laid out in the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.

Exhibits will show what the world was like before mankind had rights and how Americans realized there was a better way to govern. Throughout the weekend, Glenn Beck, David Barton, Stu Burguiere, Doc Thompson, Jeffy Fisher and Brad Staggs will lead private tours through the museum, each providing their own unique perspectives on our rights and responsibilities.

Schedule a private tour or purchase general admission ticket below:

Dates:
June 15-17

Location:

Mercury Studios

6301 Riverside Drive, Irving, TX 75039

Learn more about the event here.

About Mercury One: Mercury One is a 501(c)(3) charity founded in 2011 by Glenn Beck. Mercury One was built to inspire the world in the same way the United States space program shaped America's national destiny and the world. The organization seeks to restore the human spirit by helping individuals and communities help themselves through honor, faith, courage, hope and love. In the words of Glenn Beck:

We don't stand between government aid and people in need. We stand with people in need so they no longer need the government

Some of Mercury One's core initiatives include assisting our nation's veterans, providing aid to those in crisis and restoring the lives of Christians and other persecuted religious minorities. When evil prevails, the best way to overcome it is for regular people to do good. Mercury One is committed to helping sustain the good actions of regular people who want to make a difference through humanitarian aid and education initiatives. Mercury One will stand, speak and act when no one else will.

Support Mercury One's mission to restore the human spirit by making an online donation or calling 972-499-4747. Together, we can make a difference.

What happened?

A New York judge ruled Tuesday that a 30-year-old still living in his parents' home must move out, CNN reported.

Failure to launch …

Michael Rotondo, who had been living in a room in his parents' house for eight years, claims that he is owed a six-month notice even though they gave him five notices about moving out and offered to help him find a place and to help pay for repairs on his car.

RELATED: It's sad 'free-range parenting' has to be legislated, it used to be common sense

“I think the notice is sufficient," New York State Supreme Court Judge Donald Greenwood said.

What did the son say?

Rotondo “has never been expected to contribute to household expenses, or assisted with chores and the maintenance of the premises, and claims that this is simply a component of his living agreement," he claimed in court filings.

He told reporters that he plans to appeal the “ridiculous" ruling.

Reform Conservatism and Reaganomics: A middle road?

SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images

Senator Marco Rubio broke Republican ranks recently when he criticized the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act by stating that “there's no evidence whatsoever that the money's been massively poured back into the American worker." Rubio is wrong on this point, as millions of workers have received major raises, while the corporate tax cuts have led to a spike in capital expenditure (investment on new projects) of 39 percent. However, the Florida senator is revisiting an idea that was front and center in the conservative movement before Donald Trump rode down an escalator in June of 2015: reform conservatism.

RELATED: The problem with asking what has conservatism conserved

The "reformicons," like Rubio, supported moving away from conservative or supply-side orthodoxy and toward policies such as the expansion of the child and earned income tax credits. On the other hand, longstanding conservative economic theory indicates that corporate tax cuts, by lowering disincentives on investment, will lead to long-run economic growth that will end up being much more beneficial to the middle class than tax credits.

But asking people to choose between free market economic orthodoxy and policies guided towards addressing inequality and the concerns of the middle class is a false dichotomy.

Instead of advocating policies that many conservatives might dismiss as redistributionist, reformicons should look at the ways government action hinders economic opportunity and exacerbates income inequality. Changing policies that worsen inequality satisfies limited government conservatives' desire for free markets and reformicons' quest for a more egalitarian America. Furthermore, pushing for market policies that reduce the unequal distribution of wealth would help attract left-leaning people and millennials to small government principles.

Criminal justice reform is an area that reformicons and free marketers should come together around. The drug war has been a disaster, and the burden of this misguided government approach have fallen on impoverished minority communities disproportionately, in the form of mass incarceration and lower social mobility. Not only has the drug war been terrible for these communities, it's proved costly to the taxpayer––well over a trillion dollars has gone into the drug war since its inception, and $80 billion dollars a year goes into mass incarceration.

Prioritizing retraining and rehabilitation instead of overcriminalization would help address inequality, fitting reformicons' goals, and promote a better-trained workforce and lower government spending, appealing to basic conservative preferences.

Government regulations tend to disproportionately hurt small businesses and new or would-be entrepreneurs. In no area is this more egregious than occupational licensing––the practice of requiring a government-issued license to perform a job. The percentage of jobs that require licenses has risen from five percent to 30 percent since 1950. Ostensibly justified by public health concerns, occupational licensing laws have, broadly, been shown to neither promote public health nor improve the quality of service. Instead, they serve to provide a 15 percent wage boost to licensed barbers and florists, while, thanks to the hundreds of hours and expensive fees required to attain the licenses, suppressing low-income entrepreneurship, and costing the economy $200 billion dollars annually.

Those economic losses tend to primarily hurt low-income people who both can't start businesses and have to pay more for essential services. Rolling back occupational licenses will satisfy the business wing's desire for deregulation and a more free market and the reformicons' support for addressing income inequality and increasing opportunity.

The favoritism at play in the complex tax code perpetuates inequality.

Tax expenditures form another opportunity for common ground between the Rubio types and the mainstream. Tax deductions and exclusions, both on the individual and corporate sides of the tax code, remain in place after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Itemized deductions on the individual side disproportionately benefit the wealthy, while corporate tax expenditures help well-connected corporations and sectors, such as the fossil fuel industry.

The favoritism at play in the complex tax code perpetuates inequality. Additionally, a more complicated tax code is less conducive to economic growth than one with lower tax rates and fewer exemptions. Therefore, a simpler tax code with fewer deductions and exclusions would not only create a more level playing field, as the reformicons desire, but also additional economic growth.

A forward-thinking economic program for the Republican Party should marry the best ideas put forward by both supply-siders and reform conservatives. It's possible to take the issues of income inequality and lack of social mobility seriously, while also keeping mainstay conservative economic ideas about the importance of less cumbersome regulations and lower taxes.

Alex Muresianu is a Young Voices Advocate studying economics at Tufts University. He is a contributor for Lone Conservative, and his writing has appeared in Townhall and The Daily Caller. He can be found on Twitter @ahardtospell.

Is this what inclusivity and tolerance look like? Fox News host Tomi Lahren was at a weekend brunch with her mom in Minnesota when other patrons started yelling obscenities and harassing her. After a confrontation, someone threw a drink at her, the moment captured on video for social media.

RELATED: Glenn Addresses Tomi Lahren's Pro-Choice Stance on 'The View'

On today's show, Pat and Jeffy talked about this uncomfortable moment and why it shows that supposedly “tolerant" liberals have to resort to physical violence in response to ideas they don't like.