All posts by Wintery Knight

https://winteryknight.com/

Worse than Watergate: Biden FBI spied on eight Republican senators

I have a friend who calls himself a secular leftist, and he is always warning me not to get too excited about Trump because soon Trump will be using government to do terrible things. I ask “what sorts of terrible things?” And then he lists out the terrible things. Then I say “Oh, but those terrible things have already happened, except it was your side – Obama, Biden, etc. that did it”. He is shocked.

Here is the latest news from The Federalist:

The Biden FBI targeted eight Republican senators’ personal cell phone information as part of an investigation that evolved into lawfare against Donald Trump, new records published Monday show.

The agency document released by Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, indicates that the FBI sought and obtained the cell phone “tolling data” of eight GOP senators and Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Penn., as part of its “Arctic Frost” inquiry in 2023. That investigation ultimately became Special Counsel Jack Smith‘s elector lawfare against Trump.

According to a Senate Judiciary Committee press release, the FBI obtained the data “about the senators’ phone use from January 4 through January 7, 2021.” The information, the presser noted, “shows when and to whom a call is made, as well as the duration and general location data of the call,” but “does not include the content of the call.”

The eight Senate Republicans targeted in the probe include Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Bill Hagerty and Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, Josh Hawley of Missouri, Dan Sullivan of Alaska, Tommy Tuberville of Alabama, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, and Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming.

“Based on the evidence to-date, Arctic Frost and related weaponization by federal law enforcement under Biden was arguably worse than Watergate,” Grassley said in a statement. “What I’ve uncovered today is disturbing and outrageous political conduct by the Biden FBI. The FBI’s actions were an unconstitutional breach, and Attorney General Bondi and Director Patel need to hold accountable those involved in this serious wrongdoing.”

You thought I was kidding when I said “worse than Watergate”, but this actually is. Unfortunately, the Democrats have a lot less integrity than Republicans, so none of them are resigning when they abuse their power and weaponize government against their political opponents.

When I told my friend on the secular left about this, he said “just you wait, Trump will do it to! Trump is just about to do the same thing that the Democrats have been doing!” I guess there is no helping him – when your blindness is caused by self-delusion, there’s not much I or anyone can do to fix it. He just doesn’t want to believe that his side is the evil side, and they’ve been evil for a long time.

So, you might go on and ask yourself “why hasn’t Wintery’s friend  heard of the actions of his own political party?” And there’s a good answer for that. My friend only watches MSNBC, CNN, NBC, ABC, NPR and PBS. And late night leftist comedy shows. And if those are your only sources of news, then of course you’ll never hear about stories that are harmful to the Democrat party.

Here’s a recent example from Newsbusters:

In resurfaced texts that were released on October 3, [Jay] Jones (who is running for Virginia attorney general) suggested he would shoot then-Virginia House Speaker Todd Gilbert over Adolf Hitler and declared that Gilbert’s wife should be forced to watch his “fascist” children be killed.

[…]So how much time did the broadcast networks devote to the texts controversy?

63 seconds.

MRC analysts looked at the ABC, CBS, NBC and PBS evening, morning and Sunday roundtable shows from October 3, the day the texts were first reported by National Review, through the morning of October 7 and found just ONE mention of the Jones text scandal. The only discussion of Jones on the broadcast networks arrived on NBC’s Sunday roundtable show.

So, this is a good way to see why people on the secular left (and the religious left, too) are so ignorant. It’s not that they are stupid. Many of them are highly educated and able to earn a lot of money. No, the problem is that they deliberately lie to themselves by only choosing news sources that make them feel better than their Republican neighbors. That’s why they always think that Republicans are about to do all the evil things that the Democrats have already done.

William Lane Craig debates Walter Sinnott-Armstrong: evil, suffering and God

This is one of the top 4 best debates that William Lane Craig has ever done in my opinion. (The other three are Craig-Millican debate and the first and second Craig-Dacey debates). If you’ve never seen Dr. Craig in a debate with a non-Christian, this one is probably the best introductory one out there. Dr. Craig is the foremost defender of Christian theism on the planet, and probably of all time.

Sinnott-Armstrong is very courteous, respectful and intelligent scholar and he is very good at defending his side. This is a very cordial and engaging debate, and because it was held in front of a church audience, it was targeted to laymen and not academics. So if you are looking for a good first debate to watch, this is it! Normally, Dr. Craig debates at major universities in front of students and faculty.

There is also a book based on this debate, published by Oxford University Press. I was actually able to find a PDF of it online. I should also remind people that you can get the wonderful Craig-Hitchens debate DVD from Amazon.com if you are looking for a debate to watch, or show in your church, this is the one to start with.

The debaters:

The format:

  • WSA: 15 minutes
  • WLC: 15 minutes
  • Debaters discussion: 6 minutes
  • Moderated discussion: 10 minutes
  • Audience Q&A: 18 minutes
  • WSA: 5 minutes
  • WLC: 5 minutes

SUMMARY:

WSA opening speech:

Evil is incompatible with the concept of God (three features all-powerful, all-god, all-knowing)

God’s additional attributes: eternal, effective and personal (a person)

He will be debating against the Christian God in this debate, specifically

Contention: no being has all of the three features of the concept of God

His argument: is not a deductive argument, but an inductive/probabilistic argument

Examples of pointless, unjustified suffering: a sick child who dies, earthquakes, famines

The inductive argument from evil:

  1.  If there were an all-powerful and all-good God, then there would not be any evil in the world unless that evil is logically necessary for some adequately compensating good.
  2.  There is evil in the world.
  3.  Some of that evil is not logically necessary for some adequately compensating good.
  4. Therefore, there can’t be a God who is all-powerful and all-good.

Defining terms:

  • Evil: anything that all rational people avoid for themselves, unless they have some adequate reason to want that evil for themselves (e.g. – pain, disability, death)
  • Adequate reason: some evils do have an adequate reason, like going to the dentist – you avoid a worse evil by having a filling

God could prevent tooth decay with no pain

God can even change the laws of physics in order to make people not suffer

Responses by Christians:

  • Evil as a punishment for sin: but evil is not distributed in accordance with sin, like babies
  • Children who suffer will go straight to Heaven: but it would be better to go to Heaven and not suffer
  • Free will: this response doesn’t account for natural evil, like disease, earthquakes, lightning
  • Character formation theodicy: there are other ways for God to form character, by showing movies
  • Character formation theodicy: it’s not fair to let X suffer so that Y will know God
  • God allows evil to turn people towards him: God would be an egomaniac to do that
  • We are not in a position to know that any particular evil is pointless: if we don’t see a reason then there is no reason
  • Inductive evil is minor compared to the evidences for God: arguments for a Creator do not prove that God is good

WLC opening speech:

Summarizing Walter’s argument

  1. If God exists, gratuitous evil does not exist.
  2. Gratuitous evil exists.
  3. Therefore, God does not exist.

Gratuitous evil means evil that God has no morally sufficient reason to permit. WSA doesn’t think that all evil is incompatible with God’s existence, just gratuitous evil.

Everyone admits that there are instances of evil and suffering such that we cannot see the morally sufficient reason why God would allow it to occur.

The claim of the atheist is that if they cannot see that there is a moral justification for allowing some instance evil, then there is no moral justification for that instance of evil.

Here are three reasons why we should not expect to know the morally sufficient reasons why God permits apparently pointless evil.

  1. the ripple effect: the morally sufficient reason for allowing some instance of evil may only be seen in another place or another time
  2. Three Christian doctrines undermine the claim that specific evils really are gratuitous
  3. Walter’s own premise 1 allows us to argue for God’s existence, which means that evil is not gratuitous

Christian doctrines from 2.:

  • The purpose of life is not happiness, and it is not God’s job to make us happy – we are here to know God. Many evils are gratuitous if we are concerned about being happy, but they are not gratuitous for producing the knowledge of God. What WSA has to show is that God could reduce the amount of suffering in the world while still retaining the same amount of knowledge of God’s existence and character.
  • Man is in rebellion, and many of the evils we see are caused by humans misusing their free will to harm others and cause suffering
  • For those who accept Christ, suffering is redeemed by eternal life with God, which is a benefit that far outweighs any sufferings and evils we experience in our earthly lives

Arguing for God in 3.

  1. If God exists, gratuitous evil does not exist.
  2. God exists
  3. Therefore, gratuitous evil does not exist.

Four reasons to think that God exists (premise 2 from above):

  • the kalam cosmological argument
  • the fine-tuning argument
  • the moral argument
  • the argument from evil

Australia’s chief fascist Julie Inman Grant censors video of Iryna Zarutska murder

How desperate are open-borders secular leftists to conceal evidence of the harms caused by soft-on-crime policies? Well, in Australia, a country ruled by fascists, they are threatening fines of $825,000 (AUD) to anyone who posts the video of the murder of Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska. They don’t want voters to see the result of coddling criminals and banning self-defense.

Here’s the story from Rebel News:

Australia’s controversial eSafety Commissioner has threatened social media giant X with daily fines of up to $825,000 for refusing to take down or block posts containing CCTV footage of the fatal attack on Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska in the U.S.

The footage shows Zarutska being killed by Decarlos Brown, a man with a long record of violent crime who had been released just weeks earlier under North Carolina’s bail laws.

I blogged about the story previously, and noted that the accused killer was a 14-time repeat offender. Leftists like Julie Inman Grant don’t believe in opposing real evil or punishing real evil. They get extremely upset when their “don’t judge” policies are exposed as failed policy to voters. So what to do? Well, they just use political power to suppress anyone who shows the evidence of their failed “don’t judge” policies. After all, if people complain about being murdered, then that spoils the virtue signaling of the leftists.

This isn’t the first time they’ve tried to cover up crimes against law-abiding victims:

Inman Grant’s previous attempt to compel X to censor footage of a church stabbing in Sydney ended in failure after the platform argued Australia had no authority to impose global content restrictions. X later hailed that case as a victory for free speech.

Is Julie Inman Grant an exception, or does she represent the way that most white progressive women see the issues of crime and self-defense? Well, we know from recent surveys that leftism has surged among young women. Not just in America, but worldwide.

Young men are more conservative than young women, and more religious than young women, too.

And women’s groups are opposed to people who point out the results of their “don’t judge” policies.

Here’s a recent article from the UK Daily Mirror:

More than 100 women’s rights groups have warned “racist” attempts to link sexual violence with immigration are putting victims at increased risk.

Rape Crisis England and Wales, the End Violence Against Women Coalition and Refuge are among the organisations warning anti-migrant groups and politicans are “hijacking” survivors’ trauma.

[…]In their statement, co-ordinated by End Violence Against Women Coalition, Women for Refugee Women, Hibiscus and Southall Black Sisters, the groups said linking sex offences with migration is a “racist diversion”.

Lately, I have been seeing many posts from conservative Christian women demanding that men protect and provide for women. However, none of these conservative Christian women have said anything about the voting patterns of young women. How are men supposed to protect women, when women keep voting for more dangerous criminals, and against police and self-defense? We can’t. And we know that if we try, we’ll end up just like Kyle Rittenhouse and Daniel Perry.

Conservative, Christian women  need to think more carefully about how to solve problems. They have an addiction to their knee-jerk reaction of “men, fix it!” and “men, serve us!” But that ship has sailed. Now, the best policy of conservative, Christian women is to turn to young women, and warn them that no one is coming to save them from the consequences of their own choices. Young women need to stop voting on feelings and the desire to virtue signal.

Finally, can you imagine being married to Julie Inman Grant? That’s what parents and pastors are producing for good men these days, but what good man would be stupid enough to marry a leftist fascist like her? Men are coming to their senses, and judging women correctly. The new “10” is the stay-at-home mother who will respect her husband and homeschool the kids. Nobody wants a Karen.