You know that ‘systematic racism’ Democrats keep talking about? Now we will be able to point to a specific example.
If you’re a *white* small business owner, Joe Biden has some bad news for you. Not only will he be taxing you into oblivion, and cheering on endless lockdowns, but Joe will channel his inner Soup Nazi when it comes time to help you keep your business above water.
Keep in mind, we’re not talking about a handout to rescue badly-managed businesses that took foolish risks or got themselves over-extended. Oh, no. We’re talking about businesses that have been FORCED to close even after they invested money in addressing public concerns about sanitation and viral transmissibility.
Whose decision was it to close them? It was the government’s decision. Whose shoulders will be bearing the ultimate burdens of that closure? The business owner.
But hey it’s not like anything truly terrifying happened like the government being closed for 10 days or anything. That kind of stuff gets the media REALLY panicky. Don’t worry, though. Biden has promised Help Is On The Way!
What, you didn’t read the fine print?
Mr. ‘I will be the President of All Americans’ is already failing his first test. By ‘all’ Americans he meant, of course anybody who matters on the heirarchy of the intersectional Left.
Yay for cultural Marxism!
"Our priority will be Black, Latino, Asian, and Native American owned small businesses, women-owned businesses, and finally having equal access to resources needed to reopen and rebuild." — President-elect Biden pic.twitter.com/pIyDuhf5pH
— Biden-Harris Presidential Transition (@Transition46) January 10, 2021
Trending: BREAKING: ARTURO D’ELIA CAUGHT: Head Of Italian Aerospace Company’s IT Department Used ‘Military Grade Cyber Warfare’ To Switch Votes ‘For Trump To Biden’ -ADMISSION VIA SWORN AFFIDAVIT! HOW DID HE DO IT? WHO WERE HIS HANDLERS? VIDEO EVIDENCE!
Is that even legal?
Let’s take a look at Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, shall we?
Title VI—nondiscrimination in federally assisted programs
Prevents discrimination by programs and activities that receive federal funds. If a recipient of federal funds is found in violation of Title VI, that recipient may lose its federal funding.
This title declares it to be the policy of the United States that discrimination on the ground of race, color, or national origin shall not occur in connection with programs and activities receiving Federal financial assistance and authorizes and directs the appropriate Federal departments and agencies to take action to carry out this policy. This title is not intended to apply to foreign assistance programs. Section 601 – This section states the general principle that no person in the United States shall be excluded from participation in or otherwise discriminated against on the ground of race, color, or national origin under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.
Section 602 directs each Federal agency administering a program of Federal financial assistance by way of grant, contract, or loan to take action pursuant to rule, regulation, or order of general applicability to effectuate the principle of section 601 in a manner consistent with the achievement of the objectives of the statute authorizing the assistance. In seeking the effect compliance with its requirements imposed under this section, an agency is authorized to terminate or to refuse to grant or to continue assistance under a program to any recipient as to whom there has been an express finding pursuant to a hearing of a failure to comply with the requirements under that program, and it may also employ any other means authorized by law. However, each agency is directed first to seek compliance with its requirements by voluntary means.
Section 603 provides that any agency action taken pursuant to section 602 shall be subject to such judicial review as would be available for similar actions by that agency on other grounds. Where the agency action consists of terminating or refusing to grant or to continue financial assistance because of a finding of a failure of the recipient to comply with the agency’s requirements imposed under section 602, and the agency action would not otherwise be subject to judicial review under existing law, judicial review shall nevertheless be available to any person aggrieved as provided in section 10 of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 1009). The section also states explicitly that in the latter situation such agency action shall not be deemed committed to unreviewable agency discretion within the meaning of section 10. The purpose of this provision is to obviate the possible argument that although section 603 provides for review in accordance with section 10, section 10 itself has an exception for action “committed to agency discretion,” which might otherwise be carried over into section 603. It is not the purpose of this provision of section 603, however, otherwise to alter the scope of judicial review as presently provided in section 10(e) of the Administrative Procedure Act.
The December 11, 2019 executive order on combating antisemitism states: “While Title VI does not cover discrimination based on religion, individuals who face discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin do not lose protection under Title VI for also being a member of a group that shares common religious practices. Discrimination against Jews may give rise to a Title VI violation when the discrimination is based on an individual’s race, color, or national origin. It shall be the policy of the executive branch to enforce Title VI against prohibited forms of discrimination rooted in antisemitism as vigorously as against all other forms of discrimination prohibited by Title VI.” The order specifies that agencies responsible for Title VI enforcement shall “consider” the (non-legally binding) working definition of antisemitism adopted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) on May 26, 2016 as well as the IHRA list of Contemporary Examples of Anti-Semitism, “to the extent that any examples might be useful as evidence of discriminatory intent”.
I’m no lawyer, but this doesn’t seem like a good idea.
If any of our readers have a legal background, feel free to let us know what you think in the comments.
Cross-posted with Clash Daily
- The Nazification Of America: Biden Compares Cruz, Hawley To Nazi Propagandist (Video)
- BULLS**T! Biden And Harris Turn Capitol Police Riot Response Into Racism Issue
- After Capitol chaos, poll says Republicans expect crime to rise under Biden
- Alarming poll: 70% worry about govt. spying, expect more under Biden
- Shock Poll: Only 56% of ‘Likely Voters’ consider Biden ‘their president’
Turn your back on Big Tech oligarchs and join the New Resistance NOW! Facebook, Google and other members of the Silicon Valley Axis of Evil are now doing everything they can to deliberately silence conservative content online, so please be sure to check out our MeWe page here, check us out at ProAmerica Only and follow us at Parler, Social Cross and Gab. You can also follow us on Twitter at @co_firing_line.