GOV/MIL Leftists Call For New "Secret Police" Force To Spy On Trump Supporters (AN ABSOLUTELY MUST-READ THREAD)

marsh

On TB every waking moment

UK’s Prince Harry Demands Social Media Censorship of Americans

Didn’t we have a revolution over this?

8d48e1b0215c822bfd4358a238a0ce56

Jan 23, 2021
By
Richard Moorhead
PrinceHarryMarkle-1200x630.jpg


Britain’s Prince Harry emphasized an elitist demand for social media censorship in an interview with Fast Media this week, claiming that dissent from the western political establishment represented a threat to democracy.

We are losing loved ones to conspiracy theories, losing a sense of self because of the barrage of mistruths, and at the largest scale, losing our democracies,” the prince claimed. “The magnitude of this cannot be overstated.

Prince Harry has established himself as an American resident, previously noting his dissatisfaction with British citizens following the Brexit vote to leave the European Union. The globalist elitist lives in a multimillionaire community in southern California with his wife Meghan Markle, content to opine against American free speech liberties from his position of immense privilege.

In the interview, Harry used cloaked language to make elitist censorship demands, generally expressing alarmist views over what he claims is “misinformation,” while avoiding making an embarrassing and direct call for censorship.

The avalanche of misinformation we are all inundated with is bending reality and has created this distorted filter that affects our ability to think clearly or even understand the world around us.

Markle and Harry have sought to establish themselves as American-style celebrities in recent years, apparently seeking to fit in with the culturally monolithic coastal American elite with calls for censorship- mostly directed against Middle Americans.

Unfortunately for the Germano-British royal, the United States was established as a result of a revolution against the British Empire’s tyranny and censorship practices. At the moment, the former faces a new crisis of free expression, spurred by the censorship practices of globalist oligarchs and the Big Tech companies they puppeteer.

The UK’s monarchy is a pathetically obsolete and elitist institution, and should be immediately abolished with its hundreds of millions of pounds in assets, culturally significant works of art, and historic properties transferred to the custody of the island’s people.
 
Last edited:

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Americans don’t want woke neoliberalism
But that’s what we’re getting
January 22, 2021 | 8:01 am

woke neoliberalism

(Getty)

Written by:
Inez Stepman

It’s true that Joe Biden avoids the worst economic excesses of the open ‘democratic’ socialists of his party. His progressive politics won’t be of the sort that crosses Jeff Bezos or Nike.

But America’s 46th President is no moderate, and we should expect the Biden-Harris administration — ‘transitionary’ even in the words of its chief executive — to usher in a new form of woke neoliberalism that moves the country far to the left culturally, even as it relies on corporate America to clear the way as enforcer of the new normal.

Among the first acts of the newly-seated Democratic Congress is likely to be turning the traditional neoliberal playbook, so finely honed abroad, back towards the home front on supposed ‘domestic insurrectionists’. This term will of course not be limited to those responsible for the disgraceful Capitol riot of January 6.

But you may wonder why the left even needs the power of the state to implement a new PATRIOT Act given they have Google, Twitter, Facebook and broader cancel culture to do any controversial spying for them, and can issue sanctions as effective as any to boot.

Having effectively offloaded the tricky task of censorship on to the companies best equipped to have the social-credit system up and running ahead of schedule and under budget, the Biden administration will be free to turn to alternative goals, such as the obliteration of the legal distinction between men and women.

Expect the Democrats to avoid tackling the hairy, caucus-splitting issue of healthcare, and instead go for the soft underbelly of spineless Republicans by moving the Equality Act, which bids biological boys entrée to the girls’ high school track team.

If they’re feeling grand, they might throw in a dissolution of the Congressional deadline on the assumed-dead Equal Rights Amendment which, if not shot down by the courts, will accomplish many of the same things, but with more Constitutional gusto.

As expected for any modern presidency, the executive action side of the equation will likely be no slouch. Proving once again that Republicans are babes in the woods when it comes to efficiently wielding the power of the administrative state, in their first 24 hours the Biden administration has already released a slew of major policy changes, mostly on cultural issues.

The most dramatic of these was a reinterpretation of civil rights law to create a ‘right’ to any private spaces, including sports teams, based on ‘gender identity’ rather than biological sex, in any facility that receives federal funding.

Sweeping executive amnesty has already made our pandemic-complicated border situation worse, and may precipitate border crises of the type that were such an important component of Trump’s popularity. In another bone to his woke flank, Biden also reversed Trump’s ban on transgender people serving in the military. Expect next to see Obama-era guidance on lax school discipline — which has already resulted in tragedy — restored in the name of ‘equity’.

The former secretary of education Betsy DeVos has made turning back the clock on restored due process rights on college campuses a bit harder, by promulgating an actual regulation on the matter, but no doubt such procedural hurdles are no barrier for those on the right side of history. It’s no surprise at all that Biden this week scrapped the 1776 Commission, which sought to brainstorm alternatives to the 1619 Project for young minds, deleting it almost instantaneously from government websites.

None of this, of course, is what Americans voted for approximately 100 years ago on November 3, 2020. Donald Trump narrowly lost in key swing states, and the nearly 75 million who turned out to vote for the Bad Orange Man were joined by many more who couldn’t stomach him but split their tickets down ballot to hand the Republicans unlikely big pickups in the House —perhaps hoping to keep a check on the woke authoritarianism that they’re now about to get.

Hope for counterbalance died when two Republican senators from Georgia lost, and — if we’re honest — the Energizer bunny of ‘cultural progress’ probably would have found a way to put a wobble into weak Republican spines even if they had triumphed.

The state of the union the Biden administration inherits is grave, but if a return to 1990s normalcy is what American voters craved, they’re unlikely to get it.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Instagram Is Forcing Users to Follow Biden White House Account So That It’s Not So Pathetic Even When Users Repeatedly Un-Follow the Page

By Jim Hoft
Published January 23, 2021 at 10:06pm
instagram-white-house.jpg


Tech giants keep pushing the BIG LIE.

Instagram is forcing users to follow the Joe Biden White House account because the page had less than a million followers.

Remember
: This is the guy who allegedly had 81 million votes and exponentially more popular than Barack Obama!

From a Gateway Pundit reader: Hoping you pick up this story. If you unfollow or block the White House Instagram account, hours later you are forced to follow it again. More than half of the followers are being forced to follow the page. Seems like Instagram is trying to avoid the mainstream media picking up on Biden having less than a million followers.

blocked-wh.jpg


The comments on the page are BRUTAL!

comments-wh.jpg


comments-2.jpg
 

Deena in GA

Administrator
_______________
While in town tonight, I saw one of the large digital billboards there showing a message encouraging people to leave tips about the Capitol violence. Anyone else seeing this?
 

AlfaMan

Has No Life - Lives on TB
While in town tonight, I saw one of the large digital billboards there showing a message encouraging people to leave tips about the Capitol violence. Anyone else seeing this?

Haven't seen it around my area. But they're pounding the narrative on local radio and TV stations.
 

Greenspode

Veteran Member
While in town tonight, I saw one of the large digital billboards there showing a message encouraging people to leave tips about the Capitol violence. Anyone else seeing this?

Icachikn told me that she saw a billboard in Rochester NY encouraging people to turn in friends and family members who attended the dc (I refuse to capitalize it anymore!) rally.
 

DazedandConfused

Veteran Member

Democrats Move to Ban Trump Supporters From Joining the Military and Holding Federal Jobs

They’re not stopping with the private sector.

Jan 23, 2021
By
Jordan Epperson
MurphyTroops-1200x630.jpg


As conservatives and members of the MAGA Movement in general continue to be ostracized by the mainstream media and establishment politicians for the events that unfolded on January 6th, members of congress are moving to further compromise the lives of those who weren’t even involved in the infamous “siege.”

While many Trump supporters have been quietly disposed of by their employers, this has largely been a policy of businesses to choose with whom they want to associate with as privately owned companies. However, according to Rep. Stephanie Murphy (D-FL), supporters of Donald Trump should be barred from the public sector as well.

Murphy, who is a member of the House Armed Services Committee, has recently proposed a bill that would prevent members of the ‘Stop the Steal’ movement along with subscribers to ‘QAnon’ from being able to obtain security clearances. Security clearances are a necessity for Americans who wish to join the US Military and also a requirement to obtain a number of federal jobs.

This bill would essentially bar any American that has rallied in support of President Trump post-election or publicly voiced concern about election fraud from being able to hold a job in the Armed Forces or any federal law enforcement agency.

According to an article by the Daily Beast:

The bill inherently targets Trump supporters and anyone questioning the fraudulent results of the 2020 election or just the government in general. Murphy, a vocal supporter of the Black Lives Matter movement, has yet to propose any legislation targeting members of ANTIFA or BLM for their largely unpopular and destructive “Summer of Love” which took the lives of many and resulted in billions of dollars worth of damage.

Similarly, we could also see Stalin-style ideological purges of the US Military under the new Biden Administration and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin.

Several Democratic Senators, including Dianne Feinstein and Richard Blumenthal, joined together to write a letter to the Department of Defense requesting that a military-wide investigation be carried out through the ranks. The Senators believe the military to be a hub for “white supremacists” and “right wing extremists.”

The letter also requests that the DoD do more to prevent service members from subscribing to conspiracy theories or extremist ideology as a whole. While extremism and white supremacy clearly don’t have a place in the military and haven’t for sometime now, it’s well known that many in the federal government already consider that simply holding conservative values or supporting Donald Trump qualifies as white supremacy. Time will only tell if the requests in this letter are literal or just an attempt to further displace the millions of Americans that voted for Donald Trump in 2016 and 2020.
:prfl:
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

IED Explosion Reported at Los Angeles Church That Was Recently Criticized for ‘Anti-LGBT’ Language by Southern Poverty Law Center

By Cassandra Fairbanks
Published January 24, 2021 at 9:21am
0-89.jpg

The El Monte Police Department and FBI officials are investigating an explosion and vandalism at a Los Angeles church that was recently criticized for “anti-LGBT language.”


The First Works Baptist Church is part of a network of churches that have been criticized by the far-left extremists at the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Police Chief David Reynoso said the incident took place overnight on Saturday and that they believe the explosion was from an “improvised explosive device.”
Obscenities and the words “get out” were also found spray-painted on the front of the church.

Bruce Mejia, the pastor of First Works, said that they had reported an arson threat they received on social media two weeks ago to police. A protest was also planned for the morning after the explosion, but was cancelled due to the bombing.
“The church has been the subject of criticism in the community, and a petition calling on El Monte’s mayor to recognize the church as a hate group and ‘take them out of our city,’ has received more than 15,000 signatures,” the Hill reports.
Laura Eimiller, a spokeswoman for the FBI’s Los Angeles field office, said that they do not currently have a suspect in custody or a motive for the attack, according to a report from the New York Times.

“We have not ruled anything out,” Eimiller said.

The Los Angeles branch of the FBI put out a public call for information about the attack on social media.

“The FBI responded overnight with @elmontepolice & @LASDHQ to an #IED attack at the First Works Baptist Church in El Monte, CA. Bomb Techs & the FBI’s Evidence Team continue to process the scene. If you have a tip about the responsible party,” the FBI posted on Twitter along with a phone number for a tip line.
The FBI responded overnight with @elmontepolice & @LASDHQ to an #IED attack at the First Works Baptist Church in El Monte, CA. Bomb Techs & the FBI’s Evidence Team continue to process the scene. If you have a tip about the responsible party, please call 3104776565. #SeekingInfo pic.twitter.com/LobrjbrZtx
— FBI Los Angeles (@FBILosAngeles) January 23, 2021
Domestic terrorist Floyd Lee Corkins, who stormed the Family Research Council’s (FRC) headquarters and shot an employee who later disarmed him, admitted that he chose his target from the SPLC’s hate map list.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Costco Announces Company will Continue to Carry My Pillow Products and Honor Contract

By Jim Hoft
Published January 24, 2021 at 9:12am
mike-lindell.jpg

Earlier this week Kohl’s and Bed Bath and Beyond announced they will stop selling “My Pillow” products after CEO Mike Lindell challenged the 2020 election results.


On Saturday dozens of patriotic Americans protested at the local Bed, Bath and Beyond after the company announced earlier this week they would discontinue carrying the “My Pillow” products.

This weekend Costco announced they will continue to honor their contract with My Pillow.

MSN reported:
Tucked alongside promotional events on Costco’s website for men’s suits, mattresses and Vitamix blenders is MyPillow, the embattled pillow company.
Costco, in contrast to Bed, Bath and Beyond, Wayfair and other retailers that announced an eventual stoppage of MyPillow sales, shows no signs of ending its “special events” despite MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell’s seeming support of President Donald Trump invoking martial law during the final days of his presidency.

The beloved wholesale retailer features “special events” showcasing MyPillow’s Giza cotton sheets, pillows and mattress toppers scheduled nationwide through the end of February.
A Costco representative told SFGATE: “We have contractual commitments to MyPillow that we intend to honor, as we seek to do with all of our suppliers.”
 

Meadowlark

Has No Life - Lives on TB
The tools are already in place. Our nations intelligence complex is composed of a dozen alphabet agencies with a 75 billion dollar annual budget. Of that budget, 75% is farmed out to corporate contractors that include google, TRW, facebook, booze Allen Hamilton to name a few. All of these contractors are engaged in the global surveillance. In the past they were not allowed to surveille american citizens and instead relied on allied nations such as the UK to spy on american citizens as a courtesy. That is no longer true. All of our emails, phone calls and digital records are systematically collected and sifted through with artificial intelligence algorithms that search for key words or intentions.

Thanks to the patriot act, this enormous intelligence gathering juggernaut is increasingly being weaponized against US citizens. Now the commies want to do it openly with no restrictions. Welcome to east germany and bow to your stasi overlords.
 
Well, as a Jew, he ought to know about the Gestapo (Geheime Staatspolizei, or secret state police).

KWIM?

The ignorance of Jews never ceases to amaze me. I guess there weren’t enough of them gassed in WW2.
Logic would suggest that a possible answer to your question lies deeper than is readily apparent to a J6P outside observer.

Clearly, as you note in your comment - if the Jewish narrative is whole and true, this situation would not be occurring.

However, it IS happening.

So, either their storyline is missing <ahem> a few key critical parts, or, "Jews" really are THAT STUPID.

I do NOT buy the idea that the American Jewish folks are stupid - at all.

So, the Jewish narrative must have "more to it" than we know, which would explain the point that you are making, better.


intothegoodnight
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
[COMMENT: Up to its old tricks, the Dems will weaponize agencies of the federal government to target opposition.]


Democrats plan to target IRS in probe of pro-Trump groups that organized rally prior to Capitol riot
PUBLISHED FRI, JAN 22 20215:24 PM EST

Brian Schwartz@SCHWARTZBCNBC

KEY POINTS
  • Senate Democrats are taking aim at the IRS in a probe of dark money groups involved with the rally leading up to the deadly riot on Capitol Hill.
  • Several nonprofit groups were involved with planning and organizing the rally, including Women for America First, a 501(c)(4) organization chaired by a leading advocate of the Tea Party.
  • Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse told CNBC that the most immediate dark money groups he plans to look into are those that were involved with organizing the rally.
Supporters of U.S. President Donald Trump battle with police at the west entrance of the Capitol during a Stop the Steal protest outside of the Capitol building in Washington D.C. January 6, 2021.

Supporters of U.S. President Donald Trump battle with police at the west entrance of the Capitol during a “Stop the Steal” protest outside of the Capitol building in Washington D.C. January 6, 2021. Stephanie Keith | Reuters

Senate Democrats plan to focus on the Internal Revenue Service as part of a larger probe into tax-exempt groups that helped organized the pro-Trump rally that preceded the deadly Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol.

Democrats, led in part by lawmakers on the Senate Finance Committee, have begun asking the IRS to review the tax-exempt status of the dark money groups that were involved with the rally’s planning. At the event, then-President Donald Trump encouraged his supporters to march on the Capitol.

The eventual insurrection left five dead, including a police officer.

Several nonprofit groups were involved with planning and organizing the rally, including Women for America First, a 501(c)(4) organization chaired by a leading advocate of the Tea Party. It had been previously funded by America First Policies, a 501(c)(4) chaired by former wrestling executive and one-time Trump Cabinet member Linda McMahon.

Such groups are known as dark money organizations because they do not publicly disclose their donors.

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., the ranking member and expected chairman of the committee, recently sent a letter to IRS commissioner Charles Rettig asking him to investigate any group involved with planning the rally and to look into revoking their tax exempt status.

“I urge the IRS, in coordination with other law enforcement agencies to investigate the extent to which tax exempt organizations were involved in any part of the Capitol insurrection or actions leading up to that event, and to the greatest extent of the law, revoke the exempt status of those organizations that played a role in inciting or committing violence and other illegal acts,” Wyden told Rettig in the letter.

With control of the White House, House and Senate, Democrats may have their best opportunity yet to tighten regulations on these groups and the agency’s that are supposed to police them.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., another member of the Senate Finance Committee, is going a step further, looking into how the IRS certifies these groups. Whitehouse for years has pushed legislation that would force dark money groups to reveal their donors.

Whitehouse, in an interview late Thursday with CNBC, said he is especially focused on the groups that organized the rally, at which Trump and several of his allies pushed inaccurate claims that the election was stolen in favor of now-President Joe Biden.

“The most immediate [objective] is to look into the dark money groups involved with the ransacking of the Capitol,” Whitehouse said.

Part of the focus, he said, will be on the IRS itself and how it handles these groups.

“The question there would be to look at whether or not the IRS, bludgeoned by the right wing forces, has construed the law and enforced the law and whether their enforcement is actually consistent with the law,” Whitehouse said.

The IRS has the power to remove these groups’ tax exempt status if they overstep what the agency deems as promoting “social welfare.” Though a broad mandate, 501(c)(4)s are usually allowed to have limited political activity. They can focus on promoting certain policies that may align with candidates running for federal office.

Democrats say these groups should lose the right to remain a 501(c)(4) if they incited the riot.

Whitehouse told Treasury secretary-designate Janet Yellen during her Senate confirmation hearing that he plans to ask her to “direct a review of the IRS 501(c) policies” once she is confirmed. “It’s my belief that for a long time the policies of the IRS have been very misaligned with the statutory direction that Congress gave the IRS over these agencies,” he added.

Yellen said that she would initiate a review.

Beyond Whitehouse and Wyden, Democrats in general are making a legislative push against dark money organizations.

Within the summary of the Senate Democrats’ first orders of business is the DISCLOSE Act, which Whitehouse introduced in 2019.

The bill would require “super PACs, 501(c)4 groups and other organizations spending money in elections and on judicial nominations to disclose donors who contribute more than $10,000,” according to the Senate Democrats’ summary of the legislation.

The Senate Democrats’ priorities also include a focus on the IRS.

The separate bill would repeal “existing prohibition on the IRS from promulgating rules to bring clarity to rules governing 501(c) political activity,” the summary says.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

WATCH: Tulsi Gabbard asks Biden to denounce the targeting of all Trump supporters

Ex-presidential candidate and Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard challenged President Joe Biden on Sunday, to "truly unite" Americans.
.@joebiden Your leadership is needed now to denounce those like John Brennan & Rep Schiff who are advocating for targeting half the country as potential domestic terrorists. Truly unite the American people around our Constitution & the rights that are endowed to us by our Creator pic.twitter.com/OpemBm4biS
— Tulsi Gabbard ? (@TulsiGabbard) January 24, 2021

"Your leadership is needed now to denounce those like John Brennan & Rep Schiff who are advocating for targeting half the country as potential domestic terrorists. Truly unite the American people around our Constitution & the rights that are endowed to us by our Creator," read the tweet.

Gabbard was interviewed on Fox News where she spoke about the proposed measures for extra surveillance of alleged domestic terrorists.

"This is an issue that all Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Libertarians should be extremely concerned about, especially since we don't have to guess about where this goes or how this ends."

Gabbard slammed Brennan for including "even libertarians" in the list of "potential extremists", or "evangelical Christians". "Is it somebody who's pro-life?" asked Gabbard

"Where do you take this? You start looking at ok, obviously, has to be a white person, obviously likely male, maybe has an American flag outside their house, or maybe attended a Trump rally."

"Once you start walking along this path, you see where it leads, to a very dangerous undermining of our civil liberties, our freedoms in our Constitution, and a targeting, and a targeting of almost half the country."

Response tweets were mixed, but one social media pundit was quick to point out that Biden was involved in creating an original draft of the Patriot Act.
Doubt he does that, he authored the first draft of the patriot act. Best of luck...
— President-Elect Justin Bradley (@JustinBradley88) January 24, 2021

"Doubt he [Biden] does that, he authored the first draft of the patriot act. Best of luck...", said one user.
Please switch parties and run in 2024.
— GoldBlooded (@whodatdaddy) January 24, 2021
This last tweet simply reads "Please switch parties and run in 2024."
 
Oh really? They’re nearly universally against gun ownership and almost universally vote liberal.

I reject your statement.
As a group, Jews are well represented in the professional realms - medical, legal, capital/banking arenas, business, entertainment/MSM and state and national government roles.

I reject your statement.


intothegoodnight
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Pentagon spy agency buys US smartphone data without warrant, memo says

by Jerry Dunleavy, Justice Department Reporter |
| January 23, 2021 08:26 PM


At least some of the U.S. intelligence community purchases commercially available cellphone data containing location information from smartphone apps and uses that to search and track the movements of U.S. citizens without a grand jury subpoena or a court order, according to an unclassified memo.

The Defense Intelligence Agency told Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon in a document made public on Friday that it “provides funding to another agency that purchases commercially available geolocation metadata aggregated from smartphones," but it has only done so for "authorized purposes" five times in the past two-and-a-half years.

Sent after Wyden grilled Biden’s pick for the director of national intelligence, Avril Haines, on this issue during her confirmation hearing last week, the Pentagon intelligence arm said that “the data DIA receives is global in scope and is not identified as ‘U.S. location data’ or ‘foreign location data’ by the vendor at the time it is provisioned to DIA." The agency “processes the location data as it arrives to identify U.S. location data points, that it segregates in a separate database," the memo said, noting that DIA personnel “can only query the U.S. location database when authorized through a specific process" requiring multiple levels of approval.

Haines, who was overwhelmingly confirmed by the Senate on Wednesday night, was asked by Wyden if she would agree to inform U.S. citizens about "any circumstances in which the intelligence community purchases their data and the legal basis for doing it.” In particular, the Democrat cited concerns about privacy rights.

“I know I’m not up to date at this point, but would be if confirmed, obviously, on the degree to which we’re purchasing commercially available information, but I would seek to try to publicize, essentially, a framework that helps people under the circumstances under which we do that and the legal basis that we do that under," Haines said in reply. "I think that’s part of that's critical to promoting transparency generally, is so that people have an understanding of the guidelines under which the intelligence community operates.”

Pledging to work with Haines on this issue, Wyden stressed that “the abuses here take your breath away, and it really is a dodge on all the legal protections Americans have.”

A 2018 Supreme Court decision for Carpenter v. United States determined that “the Government’s acquisition of Carpenter’s cell-site records was a Fourth Amendment search” and that "the Fourth Amendment protects not only property interests but certain expectations of privacy as well.” The justices noted “a majority of the Court has already recognized that individuals have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the whole of their physical movements” and concluded that “allowing government access to cell-site records … contravenes that expectation.”

But the high court also emphasized that “our opinion does not consider other collection techniques involving foreign affairs or national security.”

"We confirm that DIA does not construe the Carpenter decision to require a judicial warrant endorsing purchase or use of commercially-available data for intelligence purposes,” according to the memo made public by the New York Times. The agency said that “the Court did not address the process, if any, associated with commercial acquisition of bulk commercial geolocation data for foreign intelligence / counter-intelligence purposes.”

But the DIA did claim “the privacy concerns raised by Carpenter in the law enforcement context bear on procedures DIA has put into place to control access to and use of commercial data collected from geolocations within the U.S.”
The military intelligence agency said it followed the rules detailed in the Defense Department’s manual, which “establishes procedures to enable DoD to conduct authorized intelligence activities in a manner that protects the constitutional and legal rights and the privacy and civil liberties of U.S. persons.”

Benjamin Fallon, the assistant DNI for legislative affairs, said in 2019 that “the Department of Justice and the Intelligence Community carefully consider all Supreme Court precedent, including Carpenter, when evaluating how and whether the Fourth Amendment applies to a proposed intelligence activity." He also pointed out that the reauthorization of USA Freedom Act of 2015 continued to provide Title V powers under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act for national security investigations.

Following the Supreme Court decision the year prior, “the Intelligence Community has not sought cell-site location information records or global position system records pursuant to Title V of FISA,” and “the current practice of the government under FISA is to obtain historical and/or prospective CSLI or GPS-based location information for intelligence purposes pursuant to Titles I and/or III or FISA, based upon a showing of probable cause," he said.

An investigation by the Wall Street Journal in February 2020 revealed that “the Trump administration has bought access to a commercial database that maps the movements of millions of cellphones in America and is using it for immigration and border enforcement,” and the Department of Homeland Security (specifically U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Customs and Border Protection) made use of that data.

The National Security Agency issued a guidance in August 2020 on how to mitigate the possibility of being tracked through cellphone data.

“Mobile devices store and share device geolocation data by design. This data is essential to device communications and provides features — such as mapping applications — that users consider indispensable. Mobile devices determine location through any combination of Global Positioning System and wireless signals or Bluetooth. Location data can be extremely valuable and must be protected. It can reveal details about the number of users in a location, user and supply movements, daily routines (user and organizational), and can expose otherwise unknown associations between users and locations,” the NSA said, adding that “mitigations reduce, but do not eliminate, location tracking risks in mobile devices.”

scribd doc on website

1611532642198.png
 

Dennis Olson

Chief Curmudgeon
_______________
As a group, Jews are well represented in the professional realms - medical, legal, capital/banking arenas, business, entertainment/MSM and state and national government roles.

I reject your statement.


intothegoodnight
I didn’t say they were ignorant or incapable. I said they’re STUPID. Too stupid to learn from their own history. Your opinion doesn’t impress me.

ETA: Their stupid goes all the way back to the time of Moses. That’s a record that’s never been equaled in the history of mankind.
 
Last edited:

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Biden Calls Boris Before Other European Leaders to Plan ‘Build Back Better’ Agenda
231
Boris Johnson
Boris Johnson via Twitter
KURT ZINDULKA24 Jan 2021531

Prime Minister Boris Johnson reportedly told Joe Biden that his ascendancy to the White House represented a “moment of hope in a dark time” as the leaders discussed their ‘Build Back Better’ agenda during a phone call on Saturday.
Mr Johnson is reported to be the first international leader in Europe to speak with Joe Biden as President. Relations between the two leaders appear to have warmed, after initially seeming cool due to Biden’s opposition to Brexit and Johnson’s past criticism of Barack Obama removing a bust of Sir Winston Churchill from the Oval Office.

According to a White House readout of the conversation, Biden expressed his intention to work with the Johnson administration to “revitalise transatlantic ties” and work through “multilateral organisations, on shared challenges such as combating climate change, containing COVID-19, and ensuring global health security.”

“He noted his readiness to work closely with Prime Minister Johnson as the United Kingdom hosts the G-7 and United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP26) this year,” the readout said.

A Downing Street source told The Telegraph that Johnson welcomed the “fantastic initial announcements from the Biden administration and ‘moment of hope’ in a dark time”.

A government spokesman said that the leaders “also discussed the benefits of a potential free trade deal between our two countries, and the Prime Minister reiterated his intention to resolve existing trade issues as soon as possible”.
The British paper also reported that sources in Berlin an Paris said that neither France’s President Emmanuel Macron nor Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel has spoken with Biden since his inauguration.

On social media, Mr Johnson said that it was “great to speak” with Mr Biden, saying that he looks forward to working with the 78-year-old Democrat to “drive a green and sustainable recovery from COVID-19.”

British political commentator Calvin Robinson questioned the reasoning for the green agenda push from the British premier, writing: “What do environmental issues have to do with recovering from a pandemic? What’s the plan for restoring our civil liberties? Will it be tied into a progressive green policy?”

“No building back ‘better’ thanks. Old normal will do,” Robinson said.
Great to speak to President @JoeBiden this evening. I look forward to deepening the longstanding alliance between our two countries as we drive a green and sustainable recovery from COVID-19. pic.twitter.com/Y4P3G74PPz
— Boris Johnson (@BorisJohnson) January 23, 2021
Mr Biden is expecting to begin calling other European allies on Monday. The fact that the President called Johnson before EU leaders signals that despite a recent diplomatic snafu over Biden removing the bust of Britain’s wartime leader Sir Winston Churchill from the Oval Office, like Barack Obama before him, the shared agenda of the two leaders forecast closer ties than initially expected.

Both Mr Johnson and Mr Biden have used the same slogan, ‘Build Back Better’, which has often been associated with the globalist Great Reset programme outlined by the World Economic Forum (WEF) which organises Davos.

Breitbart’s James Delingpole has described the phrase as a “United Nations invented phrase” that actually means “more world government, more green taxes and regulation, more expensive energy, more identity politics, more corporatism — and, of course, less freedom and entrepreneurialism.”

Despite often being likened to President Trump and being the leader of a notionally conservative party, Mr Johnson has in reality always aligned more closely with neo-liberals in the U.S. Democratic Party on most issues, including immigration, free trade with countries like China, and, more recently, a climate change focused green agenda.

The British leader has pledged to reduce carbon emissions in the United Kingdom to “net-zero by 2050”.

According to a report from the Global Warming Policy Foundation in February of last year, the policy could cost the UK over £3 trillion, or £100,000 per household.
On his first day in office, Mr Biden cancelled the permit for the Keystone Pipeline, an oil pipeline system in Canada and the United States. Biden’s decision to axe the plan is expected to destroy tens of thousands of jobs in America.
China Joe to jet off to the United Kingdom to meet with Boris Johnson to plot the "destiny of the world." Biden to Visit UK First to Plot ‘Destiny of the World’ with Boris Johnson
— Breitbart News (@BreitbartNews) January 18, 2021
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Professor explains: Biden’s executive order on equity: a critical assessment
By
Gennady Shkliarevsky
January 24, 2021

BIDEN’S EXECUTIVE ORDER ON EQUITY: A CRITICAL ASSESSMENT
Gennady Shkliarevsky

Racial equity is one of the most important parts of the progressive agenda. For several decades progressives have been calling for racial equity. It figured prominently in their campaigns during the last elections. Biden could not wait to get on with racial equity after the election. On the day of his inauguration, he rushed to sign the Executive Order on Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities, showing his eagerness to get on with this initiative.

The document is sweeping in its scope. Its professed goal is to eliminate racism and other forms of discrimination and to end divisions and fragmentations in American society. The executive order seeks to redress the systemic inequities that affect those who have been historically excluded and underserved in America.

The document includes a list of specific groups in this category. This list is quite extensive and is worth citing in full. It includes “Black, Latino, and Indigenous and Native American persons, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders and other persons of color; members of religious minorities; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) persons; persons with disabilities; persons who live in rural areas; and persons otherwise adversely affected by persistent poverty or inequality.” Finally, the executive order also describes the mechanism created by the government to ensure the implementation of the provisions of the executive order.

Documents that make such broad claims usually include a statement of universal principles that serve as their foundation. Remarkably, however, Biden’s executive order has nothing to this effect in it. Such conspicuous silence on something so important is a major source of problems with this document. The lack of rational justification makes this document and its provisions appear to be subjective, arbitrary, and irrational. One has legitimate concerns, for example, about the criteria used in identifying groups that have been, according to the document, marginalized and underserved.

There is also another source of concern regarding the objectivity and rationality of the executive order. According to this document, the government and its bureaucracy are to play the primary role in formulating, designing, and implementing the policy of racial equity. There is not as much as even a mention of any public involvement. All the levers that control this policy are in the hands of the government.

Social and political scientists, including scholars of such stature as Roberto Michels and Max Weber, have repeatedly argued that government bureaucracies are not impartial bodies. They have their own corporate mentality, ethos, and interests. The corporate nature of the government undoubtedly affects its decisions and policies.

The policy of racial equity is certainly no exception in this sense. The fact that the government is primarily responsible for formulating and implementing this policy suggests that the executive order makes no provisions that would help control bureaucratic parochialism and make sure that this policy is not subjective, arbitrary, and irrational.

The lack of a clear statement of universal principle or principles that would justify the progressive policy of racial equity makes the executive order appear subjective, arbitrary, and irrational. Racism is a form of exclusion. Selected inclusion, as proposed by the executive order, is not the way to eliminate exclusion because while including some, it excludes others, thus perpetuating divisions and fragmentation in society. The only way to eliminate exclusion—the professed goal of the executive order—is through universal inclusion and empowerment. A selective inclusion is always tainted by subjective and arbitrary choices.

There are also other problems with the executive order. Although perhaps less significant, they add, however, to the overall confusion of the document as a whole. For example, it uses the term “equity.” The meaning of equity is the equality of outcomes. Yet the document also emphasizes “equal opportunity” which means something totally different. One can easily imagine a situation in which equal opportunities may lead to vastly unequal outcomes.

Confusion in public policy usually has serious consequences. It inevitably leads to failure. The confusion in the policy of racial equity is also likely to have this outcome. Instead of unity, it will create more divisions and rivalries in our already increasingly fragmented society.
 
I didn’t say they were ignorant or incapable. I said they’re STUPID. Too stupid to learn from their own history. Your opinion doesn’t impress me.

ETA: Their stupid goes all the way back to the time of Moses. That’s a record that’s never been equaled in the history of mankind.
Maybe the "history" needs a bit more fleshing out.

Your opinion doesn't impress me.


intothegoodnight
 

Beach

Veteran Member
Folks, I've only briefed through all the articles in this thread, but it's one of the most worrying threads I've ever seen here. And there have been many that, if true, would be plenty of reason to worry about. We're all going to need like minded people moving forward. Don't battle each individual opinion. Battle against the wokeness. We're all going to need a side to stick to and learn to trust. The best teams are comprised of individuals with different opinions, but with the same goal.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
Establishment War Against “We the People” – Paul Craig Roberts | Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog gold is often discussed

Rumble video link on website 48:49 min

By Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com

Former Assistant Treasury Secretary and award winning journalist Dr. Paul Craig Roberts (PCR) says the country has changed dramatically since the massively fraudulent and rigged 2020 Election that put Joe Biden in the White House.

Dr. PCR says, “First, consider there is now an organized war by the establishment against anyone who takes exception to their explanation of the election. We see, for example, free speech is now dead. Many of the institutions in the United States no longer believe in it. You can’t protest what you perceive as a stolen election without being called an enemy of democracy.

Well, someone who is protesting what they perceive as a stolen election is defending democracy. Now, that means they are an enemy because the narrative can’t be challenged. You can’t say anything is wrong with the 2020 Election even if you have enormous evidence. So, you don’t have free speech.

Also, a lot of people who attended the Trump rally (in Washington D.C. 1/6/21) have been fired simply for attending the rally. So, you don’t have freedom of association. You cannot do anything that is seen as opposition to the establishment. . . . Biden was demanding personal allegiance from the troops who defended the inauguration. So, it looks more and more like a dictatorship.”

Dr. PCR goes on to say, “The evidence is overwhelming that the election was stolen. There is no doubt about it. . . . Let’s assume we don’t really know if the election was stolen. We do know everybody who voted for Trump believes it was stolen. We also know from the polls that 30% of Democrats believe it was stolen.
. . .So, if that many people believe it was stolen, the government has an obligation to investigate and tell the people we looked at the evidence . . . and say it was or was not stolen, but they refuse to look at the evidence. They had the explanation ready, and the explanation was ‘there’s no evidence.’

. . . They failed, we have a divided country and they just let the country be divided. Now, they are going to pass a domestic terrorism law, and the purpose is to further control any dissent. . . . This is why I say we have crossed a line. This is like Caesar crossing the Rubicon. That was the end of the Roman Republic. This is the end of democracy. . . . The Republican Party is dead because they failed Trump voters.”

Dr. PCR, who holds a PhD in Economics, says the Biden Administration policies are going to tank the U.S. economy. For example, on Biden’s first day in office, he canceled the XL Pipeline and re-entered the Paris Climate Accord. That killed tens of thousands of U.S. jobs with the stroke of Biden’s pen. Again, this was on the very first day in office. Dr. PCR says, “The economy is already wrecked, and so Biden is going to wreck a wrecked economy.”

The biggest problem Dr. PCR sees is not the federal debt. Dr. PCR says, “The federal debt is not the problem, the real problem is the private debt. . . . The debt burden of the population has gone up over the last 25 years, and this is the difficult problem. Income now is completely utilized in debt service. This is what is meant by debt deflation. Since the consumer is utilizing their money in debt service, there is no money for discretionary spending. Therefore, there is nothing to support the rest of the economy. . . . Then, the lockdowns come, and they further restrict the income flow to the people who are already drowning in debt. . . . The debt needs to be written off, but that is hard to do. . . . So, when people talk about a collapse, this will be the cause of the collapse. We will have a debt deflation collapse and not hyperinflation.”

Join Greg Hunter as he goes One-on-One with award winning journalist Dr. Paul Craig Roberts.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Trump's Potential Legacy: 50 Million+ Enemies Of The State

SUNDAY, JAN 24, 2021 - 23:30
Authored by Tho Bishop via The Mises Institute,
Well, they finally got Donald Trump. But he sure scared the bejesus out of them.

It took a massive five-year campaign of hysteria, of fear and hate, orchestrated by all wings of the Ruling Elite, from the respectable right to the activist left. The irony, of course, is that the last actions of Trump’s presidency highlighted how little of a threat he, as an individual, truly was to the deep corruption in America’s government. Lil Wayne may be free, but figures like Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, and Ross Ulbricht are not. The Fed’s big fat bubble has only gotten larger as Wall Street has thrived, while American workers continue to be "discriminated against."


If historians look back at simply the Trump administration’s policy legacy, the controversial nature of his tenure may confuse. A record of tax cuts, deregulation, runaway spending, an Israeli-Saudi-focused Middle East policy, criminal justice reform, and stacking the federal court with conservative judges on paper seems firmly aligned with the Republican Party of the modern era. Compromises on gun issues, the inability to replace Obamacare—or even reject its core tenets. His calls for larger stimulus relief would perhaps lead some to believe that he was relatively moderate in the current environment.

Looking back, Trump’s most radical act of governance may be his simple embrace of federalism in the face of the coronavirus. Whether this stemmed from a genuine belief in the limits of practical federal power or a desire to have the flexibility to blame governors if a state’s response became unpopular, the administration’s willingness to allow states to take the leading role in devising a policy response allowed for one of the greatest illustrations of the importance of political centralization in recent American history. Trump allowed Florida to be Florida and New York to be New York. The ability to compare state performance has been essential at a time when "medical experts" were being weaponized in support of covid tyranny.

All of this, however, would miss the true significance of the last four years.

Trump’s legacy will be that of a political leader who, at a time when American politics was still adjusting to social media and user-created content, leaned into the polarization of American politics rather than pay lip service to "national unity." A critic would claim this comes from Trump’s unquenchable need to have his ego stoked. A supporter would see a man who understood the need to realign American politics—but the underlying motivations are irrelevant.

Trump’s impact on American politics may result in an even greater impact on the US government than his collaboration with Mitch McConnell on the judiciary.

A variety of polling indicates that as Donald Trump boarded Marine One to retreat to Mar-a-Lago, he does so with most of his voters believing he is the rightful president of the United States. One poll showed almost 80 percent of Republicans "do not trust the results of the 2020 presidential election." If we estimate that 75 percent of all of Trump’s 2020 voters hold this view, that leaves us with over 50 million Americans who believe they now live under an illegitimate federal government.

This reality terrifies Washington’s political class more than anything Donald Trump could have done while occupying the White House.

As Murray Rothbard illustrated in Anatomy of the State, "What the State fears above all, of course, is any fundamental threat to its own power and its own existence." A vital part of the state’s existence is its ability to justify its action with a mantle of "legitimacy"—which in an age of democracy comes from the notion of the "consent of the governed."

The result of 50+ million Americans viewing the next president as a fraud imposed on the people is an inauguration taking place in a Washington, DC, that resembles a warzone, surrounded by soldiers whom the regime does not trust with their own ammo.

The downside of America’s regime acting from a place of fear is that it is likely to ruthlessly lash out like most violent predators tend to do. Since the actions at the Capitol on January 6, the corporate press has elevated a collection of "terrorism experts" who have explicitly called for the tools formed in the war on terror to be turned inward to deal with the growing Trump "insurrectionist threat."

As Glenn Greenwald notes, "No speculation is needed. Those who wield power are demanding it."

The upside is that the tremendous growth of federal powers has always been dependent upon the public’s understanding that such power was being wielded in their own defense. Therefore, democracy has, rather than being a public check against tyranny, more often been a way of peacefully empowering officials to get away with abuses that autocrats could only manage with explicit violence.

To quote Rothbard:
As Bertrand de Jouvenel has sagely pointed out, through the centuries men have formed concepts designed to check and limit the exercise of State rule; and, one after another, the State, using its intellectual allies, has been able to transform these concepts into intellectual rubber stamps of legitimacy and virtue to attach to its decrees and actions. Originally, in Western Europe, the concept of divine sovereignty held that the kings may rule only according to divine law; the kings turned the concept into a rubber stamp of divine approval for any of the kings’ actions. The concept of parliamentary democracy began as a popular check upon absolute monarchical rule; it ended with parliament being the essential part of the State and its every act totally sovereign.
As such, even if aggressive actions by the Biden administration to address the specter of a Trump-inspired insurrection have the explicit support of nominally Republican leaders such as Mitch McConnell or Kevin McCarthy, how would such action be seen by MAGA America? If forced to choose, would someone like Governor Ron DeSantis align himself with a "bipartisan" effort from Washington elites or choose to be a leader of Biden-era resistance? Even if the resistance to a Biden administration is not ideologically libertarian or fundamentally "antistate," an explicit rejection of federal domination would be a vital first step toward the sort of political decentralization and self-governance that any peaceful political order ultimately requires.

Of course, all of this assumes that Trump’s base remains loyal—or at least remains hostile to the new regime. If Biden governs the same way he campaigned, by largely staying out of sight and avoiding making any bold statements and commitments one way or another, perhaps the public can be once again pacified and partisan divisions reduced to largely superficial differences, as has been the case for much of the current era.

If, however, the Biden administration governs more like the corporate press and blue Twitter wants him to - waging war on gender roles, prioritizing transgender issues, pushing for job-killing economic policy during a pandemic, acting unilaterally on immigration, penalizing gun owners, "reeducating" Trump supporters, treating MAGA like Al Qaeda, etc. - then the divides between Trump’s America and Biden’s America could become only further entrenched. And that is not even factoring in what happens if America experiences the hardship of an economic crisis.

Trump’s legacy will not be shaped by his actions—or even by how his enemies portray him. Ultimately, it comes down to his base and the movement he inspired. As Lew Rockwell noted in a recent interview with Buck Johnson, "The Jeffersonians were much better than Jefferson. The Taftians were much better than Robert Taft. The Trumpians tend to be much better than Trump."

Should skepticism of the 2020 election, fueled by a new administration's actions, finally convince 50+ million Trump supporters that the barbarians in the Beltway do not represent them and to react accordingly, then Trump’s presidency will be—despite his own actions—the disruption that America’s elites truly feared.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

If "Facebook Is Private", Why Are They Feeding Users' Private Messages Directly To The FBI?

SUNDAY, JAN 24, 2021 - 22:30
Authored by Matt Agorist via TheFreeThoughtProject.com,

Despite decrying censorship when it was happening to them last year, when Donald Trump was banned from Twitter and Facebook earlier this month, the left praised the move by big tech. “Facebook is a private company and can do what they want,” the pro-censorship hypocritical crowd chanted ad nauseum through the digital ether after bad orange man was silenced. But as we have said time and again, Facebook being private is simply not true.

Now, however, Facebook has made an unscrupulous Faustian bargain with the federal government which should eliminate all doubt once and for all. They are now willfully handing over private messages of Trump supporters who talked about the events at the capitol on January 6.


Google, Apple, and Amazon all moved to wipe the pro-Trump social media network Parler from the internet earlier this month because of what users on the platform discussed. It was alleged that the handful of dolts who stormed the capitol on January 6 had solely used Parler to plan their laughable, unarmed, silly, unsuccessful, and pitiful attempt to keep Trump in the White House.

Despite the ragtag group of Trumpians posing for selfies, photo-ops, and hanging from banisters, the only thing they accomplished was having D.C. turned into a scene akin to North Korea for Biden’s inauguration. Most honest experts in the media have acknowledged that though a few members of the mob thought they were part of some historic coup to keep their leader in power, the idea that they had any real chance at an insurrection was misleading at best and sheer propaganda used to further the domestic police and surveillance state at worst.

Oh gosh, I hope this doesn't mean the magnitude of the threat has been wildly exaggerated for political gain, media excitement and ratings, censorship orgies, and laying the foundation for a new fear-driven Domestic War on Terror to control politics and information. https://t.co/oHhUPojpSO
— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) January 21, 2021
Deferring all responsibility for the planning of the raid on the capitol, Facebook chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg had stated shortly after the incident that the protests were largely organized off Facebook. However, she was not telling the truth, and likely knew that large portions of the pro-Trump protests were talked about and organized on Facebook. But was Facebook wiped off the internet like Parler? No, no it was not. Here’s why.

This week, Facebook began furnishing the Federal Bureau of Investigation with data on Trump supporters who discussed the events at the capitol on their platform - up to and including their private messages. Through this action the social media giant is acting as a de facto intelligence collecting arm of the US government.

In contrast, when Syed Farook, otherwise known as the San Bernardino mass shooter, wouldn’t unlock his iPhone for the feds, Apple refused to create a backdoor for them to access it acting as an actual private company supporting the privacy rights of its customers. But Facebook is more than willing to open up its data mining services for their friends in the federal government — because, as we have stated numerous times, Facebook is not private.

As TFTP reported in 2018, Facebook announced that it partnered with the arm of the government-funded Atlantic Council, known as the Digital Forensic Research Lab that was brought on to help the social media behemoth with “real-time insights and updates on emerging threats and disinformation campaigns from around the world.”

The Atlantic Council is the group that NATO uses to whitewash wars and foster hatred toward Russia, which in turn allows them to continue to justify themselves. It’s funded by arms manufacturers like Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, and Boeing. It is also funded by billionaire oligarchs like the Ukraine’s Victor Pinchuk and Saudi billionaire Bahaa Hariri.

The list goes on. The highly unethical HSBC group — who has been caught numerous times laundering money for cartels and terrorists — is listed as one of their top donors. They are also funded by the pharmaceutical industry, Google, Goldman Sachs and others. However, the funding that comes from the United States, the US Army, and the Airforce directly negates the “private” aspect of the partnership.

The “think tank” Facebook partnered with to make decisions on who they censor is directly funded by multiple state actors — including the United States — which voids any and all claims that Facebook is a wholly “private actor.”

The Atlantic Council wields massive influence over mainstream media too, which is why when this partnership was announced, no one in the mainstream press pointed it out as the Orwellian idea that it is. Instead, headlines such as “US think tank’s tiny lab helps Facebook battle fake social media(Reuters)” and “Facebook partners with Atlantic Council to improve election security (The Hill)were put out to spin the fact that a NATO propaganda arm is now censoring the information Americans see on Facebook.

But this partnership with the state-funded “think tank” is not the only reason Facebook is not private.

From government funded censorship arms to the revolving door of high level bureaucrats who fill the ranks of the oligopolies, the “private company” Facebook concept comes crashing down when taking a closer look. Private-sector firms do not need to be explicitly nationalized to further the establishment’s interests; it’s enough to install their alumni in top regulatory positions. Through these methods, Facebook can put on the façade of privatization while actually acting as deputies for the state but alleviating any constitutional checks in the process.

All the while, whenever the censorship acts in their benefit, half of the masses cheer it on and defend it, keeping resistance at a minimum.

What’s more, as the government hangs the threat of antitrust litigation over their heads, it can force these companies to act in their benefit even without explicit partnerships like that of the Atlantic Council. In fact, prior to the state getting involved in the talks of regulation into big tech, information flowed relatively freely with Facebook only removing racist and violent content. Now, however, as they bend to the will of their partners in the federal government, people like myself find ourselves on 30 day bans for saying “censorship leads to tyranny.”

This is why the answer to the government big tech censorship leviathan lies not in regulation but in boycott. The time is now to get off these platforms who spy on you, ban you, sell you to the highest bidder, and who are tearing society apart. Censorship free platforms exist and are far more user friendly and treat you as the actual customer instead of the sheep they are leading to slaughter. You can check them out here.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

"New McCarthyism Will Prove An Orwellian Mistake" Says US Historian

MONDAY, JAN 25, 2021 - 14:40
Authored by Pavlos Papadopoulos via eKathimerini.com,
Victor Davis Hanson is a rare breed of American intellectual: The professor of classics and military history at the California State University and senior fellow in classics and military history at Stanford University’s Hoover Institute has supported Donald Trump in a number of books and articles.

In an email interview with Kathimerini, Hanson offered his opinion on recent developments in Washington, shedding light from a conservative angle on a number of issues that define modern America.

Do you think that Trump went too far in inciting violence, ignoring the fact that in the previous two months all legislatures in disputed states and all judges had already decided that the claims of a “stolen election” were baseless, proving that there was no election fraud?
Trump had a right to lodge legitimate inquiries about election irregularities given 100 million voted by mail or through “early voting” before Election Day – 61 percent of the voting electorate. Traditional authentication was impossible under those Covid-19 rules. All agree that in many key states voting laws were wrongly changed by local magistrates and judges.
But whether these and other egregious laxities in voting would have given Trump the strategically located ca. 42,000 votes (out of 165 million cast) necessary to win the key states for an Electoral College victory was uncertain. After the second week in December, when the state electors were chosen, there was almost no chance of changing the election. And at the point it should have been in Trump’s interest to concede, galvanize conservatives to save the Republican senate by winning the two seats in the runoff election in Georgia, and then to play the loyal opposition as the country from 2021-22 might well tire of what will likely be the most radically left-wing agenda enacted since 1964 or 1932. Instead, he persisted, alienated swing voters, appeared a sore loser and gave the impression to his supporters that the election results would be overturned – again an impossibility. The storming of the Capitol by splinter groups from the massive protests [on January 6] – rightly condemned by conservatives in a way the summer Antifa and BLM nightly rioting and looting was not by the Left – essentially made him politically inert.
Trump’s recent but belated concession, and calls for unity and calm may be too little too late to save his legacy – but then in second-chance America maybe not.
Will political conflict persist in the US or have we witnessed the end of the Trump era of division and hatred?
Trump was a symptom not a catalyst of the hatred. Radical changes due to globalization, enormous concentrations of wealth on the coasts, 50 million non-native-born residents, and a hollowed out manufacturing and assembly industry all created a new volatility. His sin was replying back in kind to the attacks of the Left crudely and in a way Bush, McCain and Romney did not.
He also sought not to stop but to roll back the entire left-wing agenda, and by February 2020, in the pre-Covid months, might well have been re-elected given a booming economy, secure borders, a calmer world abroad and his victory over the special prosecutor, the impeachment conviction effort, and the media’s nonstop assaults. Almost all of the so-called administrative state, the rich, and the permanent bureaucracy, academia, the media, and entertainment despised him for both cultural and political reasons.
After March 2020, the pandemic, the recession, the lockdown, the George Floyd death, the months of looting, arson, and protest and radical changes in voting laws all empowered the Left and finally undid Trump – as did his own constant tweets and fiery feuding that estranged moderate and swing suburban voters. The Left will not try to unite the country; its aim is instead to transform the country into something like a European democratic socialist state, if not more leftward still.
This is not the Democratic Party of old, but a progressive movement that seeks an “equality-of-result” society and demands the power to enforce its ideological aims.
Could we say that the core of the political energy that sustains the Trump movement might have something to do with the politics of race and the fact that a core white constituency cannot accept that the blacks can have equal access to the democratic electoral process?
That was the complaint the Left made against Trump. But Trump’s critics were bewildered by his ability to increase black support to 15% and Latino support to 35%, largely by redefining the once-elite establishment Republican Party as a populist workers party, in which class commonalities replaced racial solidarity. You may have an antiquated sense of binaries. The US is not a 90-10 white/black society, but rather a 67% white / 33% Latino, Asian, black country in which increasingly the largest growing group is of those of so-called mixed race. Intermarriage between ethnic and racial groups is now normative and insidiously replacing these rigid racial categories of the past, and with decreased illegal immigration, assimilation and integration accelerate. It is actually the Democratic Party that in anachronistic fashion seeks to cling to identity politics and a salad-bowl separatism rather than the melting pot. There have been tremendous changes in American political parties in the last 20 years. The Democratic Party outspends Republicans 2-1 in political races, and is fueled by the staggering bicoastal wealth of Wall Street and Silicon Valley; it is a party of the very rich and subsidized poor and does not like the culture or values of the middle classes, which now overwhelmingly vote Republican. Trump’s fiercest critics were both rich, never-Trump corporate Republicans and woke bicoastal liberal elites.
Would you say that moves by Democrats for Trump’s second impeachment and the locking of his social media accounts serve to control or further embolden the so-called “Trump movement” that questions the very legitimacy of the elections and the credibility of the government and the judiciary?
The efforts of “Big Tech” to ban Trump and many of his supporters, while Apple, Google etc in concert made it almost impossible for a conservative site like Parler to exist, are reflections of a Salem Witch trial madness sparked by the trifecta of Trump’s loss, the Capitol violence, and the Republican loss of the Senate. Hysteria reigns as books by conservatives are now canceled, thousands kicked off social media, radio hosts fired etc. We are in a sort of left-wing version of the Corleone “Godfather” cinema family “taking care of business” all at once. Yet this new McCarthyism will prove an Orwellian mistake, and constitute one of the greatest political blunders in modern US history. Think of the Ayatollah Khamenei calling for the destruction of Israel on Twitter with impunity or Antifa announcing planning sessions for their next riot, on Facebook with impunity – juxtaposed to social media banning those who merely showed up in Washington at a peaceful rally and did not join the violent splinter group who stormed the halls of Congress.
In contrast, again, the current Vice President Harris earlier had called for the more protests this summer. Many were violent and occasionally lethal, resulting in mass looting, death and arson by Antifa and BLM. She worked to bail out those arrested for street violence. The public is tiring of such asymmetries. US publishers all the time publish books like “In Defense of Looting” – a manifesto supporting the mass theft from stores this summer. So there is no consistency in the current violations of free speech. And the effort to remove Trump before his tenure not only failed, but showed his opponents as small-minded and vindictive and further divided a 50/50 divided country. The attempt to coordinate Big Tech to destroy the conservative opposition’s means of communicating with the public came by design on the eve of the most revolutionary moments in modern history to come: Very soon the Left’s plans to end the 180-year Senate filibuster, the 234-year Electoral College, the 60-year 50-state union (by adding Puerto Rico and Washington DC), and the 150-year-old nine-person Supreme Court – and now will have its critics de-platformed from social media or afraid to express objections in fear of being banned.
The 5-trillion-dollar Silicon Valley monopolies – who gave directly over $200 million to the Biden campaign and $500 million to particular voting precincts and registrars deemed valuable in encouraging turnout vital to their agendas – use the public airways, and are supposedly forbidden by anti-trust laws from conspiring to destroy competition. So I think when the madness ceases, there will be calls to apply anti-trusts laws to these modern octopuses. They in so many ways use their cartels and fortunes in the manner the railroads, and the oil companies did in the 19th century – before they were broken up and regulated. That is a long answer, yes, the hysterical giddiness at the Trump loss and the unfortunate Capitol violence, coupled with overreach by Leftists who now control the government, will in time lead to a reaction itself.
This is America, where free speech and expression cannot be wiped out in a preplanned hit by Silicon Valley to aid a political agenda, whose radicalism will turn off the public.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Levin: ‘Nothing That Joe Biden Has Done Since His Inauguration Speech Demonstrates Any Form of Unity — It’s Conformity’

TRENT BAKER24 Jan 20216,205

Fox News Channel “Life, Liberty & Levin” host Mark Levin on Sunday hit President Joe Biden over executive action he has taken his first week in office.
Levin highlighted how Biden ran on uniting the country. He then noted that Biden’s actions have instead been about “conformity” rather than uniting the country.

“Joe Biden made much of the word unity,” Levin stated. “Nothing that Joe Biden has done since his inauguration speech demonstrates any form of unity. It’s conformity. Conformity. He’s there proudly signing one executive order after another. These executive orders do what? Taxpayer-paid-for abortion on demand, even one minute before birth. The Paris climate accords, which ought to be a treaty, which ties our hands, plus his war on American energy. Who benefits from that? Communist China, of course. So, that does more damage to us than communist Chinese could ever hope to do. Open borders. The Iran deal. The World Health Organization that is controlled by communist Chinese and lied to us and caused us grave damage at the beginning of this virus.”

He continued, “He’s destroyed women’s sports because now boys who are genetically still boys get to participate in women’s sports, so that will affect the girls for a very, very long time in our high schools and colleges and universities. What else? COVID-19. He comes up with a $1.9 trillion package that has almost nothing to do with COVID-19. Massive payoff to the teachers’ unions, to blue state mayors, to blue state governors to help them pay off the debt they acquired long before the virus. And he has no real vaccine distribution plan. He says I want 100 million vaccines given in 100 days. Well, guess what. He took office. We were doing a million each day, which means 100 million in 100 days.

His only plan in that regard is to trash Trump, to dumb down all those achievements, and to make some absurd claim that he has done some great job.

There’s been no unity. In fact, we have a situation now, and I think we are in a constitutional crisis.”
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Impeachment trial to keep National Guard troops at Capitol
There are fears of mass demonstrations.
Members of the National Guard work inside a secured area of the U.S. Capitol complex on Jan. 16


Federal law enforcement officials told lawmakers the impeachment trial poses a big enough threat to require thousands of National Guard troops to remain in Washington through mid-March. | Jacquelyn Martin/AP Photo
By ANDREW DESIDERIO, LARA SELIGMAN and NATASHA BERTRAND

01/24/2021 10:27 AM EST

Former President Donald Trump’s upcoming Senate impeachment trial poses a security concern that federal law enforcement officials told lawmakers last week requires as many as 5,000 National Guard troops to remain in Washington through mid-March, according to four people familiar with the matter.

The contingency force will help protect the Capitol from what was described as “impeachment security concerns,” including the possibility of mass demonstrations coinciding with the Senate’s trial, which is slated to begin the week of Feb. 8.

Despite the threat, the citizen soldiers on the ground say they have been given little information about the extension and wonder why they are being forced to endure combat-like conditions in the nation’s capital without a clear mission.

“Quite frankly this is not a ‘combat zone,’ so combat conditions shouldn’t apply,” said one Guard member on the ground in D.C. who has deployed twice to Afghanistan.

Several National Guard units have seen their deployments extended involuntarily, though a majority of Guardsmen remaining in Washington will do so on a volunteer basis. Around 7,000 troops will continue to provide riot security through the beginning of February, with that number decreasing slightly to 5,000 by the time Trump’s impeachment trial begins.

“We are not going to allow any surprises again,” said one Guard member, referring to the widespread lack of preparedness for the insurrection on Jan. 6.
There is also some concern over potential unrest surrounding March 4, the date some QAnon conspiracy theorists believe Trump will be inaugurated for the second time.

A Capitol Police spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.
National Guard troops were deployed to the capital city in the aftermath of the Jan. 6 riots at the Capitol, when supporters of Trump stormed the building while Congress was certifying President Joe Biden’s Electoral College victory. The House impeached Trump a week later, charging him with “willful incitement of insurrection.”

By Inauguration Day, around 25,000 troops were in Washington, where unprecedented security measures were put into place to prevent similar attacks.
Now, thousands of Guard members will remain in Washington far longer than they initially expected when they packed their suitcases for what they believed to be a short-term mission on Jan. 6. The rank-and-file have so far been given no official justifications, threat reports or any explanation for the extended mission, said two Guard members — nor have they seen any violence thus far.

“There is no defined situation, or mission statement. … This is very unusual for any military mission,” said one member, who has deployed twice to Afghanistan. “We are usually given a situation, with defined mission perimeters, and at least a tentative plan on how to execute those objectives.”

“Some don’t even know how long they’ll be here,” said another Guard member.

[COMMENT: US Constitution
First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.]
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Dems Seek to Root Out White Nationalism in Military After Capitol Siege
a protest amassed outside the capitol building with a large american flag in the background

(AP)
By Solange Reyner | Sunday, 24 January 2021 09:09 PM

The siege of the U.S. Capitol has created a new urgency for lawmakers and the Pentagon to root out white nationalism and right-wing activism in the U.S. military.

Congress plans to insert language into this year's National Defense Authorization Act to address extremism at the Pentagon and other federal agencies, according to The Hill.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and a group of House Democrats last week called on the Department of Defense to investigate and address white supremacy and extremist ideology in the ranks of the military.

The Pentagon is already taking steps to identify and root out far-right extremism in the ranks, including monitoring social media postings from service members.

The Defense Department inspector general also announced an investigation into DOD efforts to develop and implement policy and procedures addressing ideological extremism with the U.S. Armed Forces.

Nearly 1 in 5 people charged in connection with the riot Jan. 6 have some form of military background, according to an NPR analysis.

"The attack on our Capitol was an insurrection fueled in large part by groups that espouse the same extreme white supremacists' views – groups that actively recruit veterans and from the ranks of our military," Rep. Anthony Brown, D-Md., said in a statement to The Hill.

"We must recommit ourselves to rooting these beliefs out of our ranks, protecting our servicemembers from radicalization and ensuring all Americans feel safe serving the country we all love," he added.

In 2019, the Republican-controlled Senate cut the phrase "white nationalist" from a measure in the NDAA, which was intended to explicitly address the threat of white nationalists in the military.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
Sen. Hawley: It’s time to stand up against the muzzling of America
By Josh Hawley
January 24, 2021 | 8:22pm | Updated

REPUBLICAN CONTRIBUTIONS IN MANY
Josh Hawley calls out ‘muzzling of America’ in New York Post op-ed

Have you checked your social credit score lately? You might want to. Mine seems to have taken a nosedive this month. You might want to see how yours is doing.
Everyone knows what a credit score is. But social credit scores are new. They’re the latest corporate import from Communist China, where government and big business monitor every citizen’s social views and statements.

And they’re the latest form of cancel culture in this country, as corporate monopolies and the left team up to shut down speech they don’t like and force their political agenda on America. For those who still believe in free speech and the First Amendment, this is the time to take a stand.

Like the old-fashioned kind of credit score, your social credit requires a lot of maintenance. You’ll need to get good grades in school and stay out of trouble with the law. But that’s just the start — you have to earn your right to live in polite society these days. So if you want to get a good job, stay at hotels and be served at restaurants, you will need to do a few other things. You will need to voice the right opinions. You will need to endorse the right ideas. You will need to conform. That’s what the corporate chieftains tell us, anyway.

They tried to reprimand me this month because I didn’t. On behalf of the voters of my state, I raised a challenge to the presidential electors from Pennsylvania after that state conducted the election in violation of the state constitution.

Maybe you agree with me. Maybe you don’t. But whatever your view, corporate America’s rush to cancel those it dislikes should trouble you.

In my case, it started with leftist politicians demanding I resign from office for representing the views of my constituents and leading a democratic debate on the floor of the Senate.

Taking that cue, a corporate publishing house then canceled a book it had asked me to write. Ironically enough, the book is about political censorship by the most powerful corporations in America. (And will be published by an independent publishing house.) Now corporate America is canceling my political events, because two parties are apparently one too many for their taste.

It will get worse. The tech titans have already booted dozens of conservatives off social media, and if they have their way, half the House Republican conference will be expelled from Congress. The corporate titans seem to believe that the only way to get a democracy to their liking is to eliminate all threats to the Democratic Party’s unified control of government.

The alliance of leftists and woke capitalists hopes to regulate the innermost thoughts of every American, from school age to retirement. And they’ve trained enforcers of the woke orthodoxy to monitor dissent or misbehavior. A “Karen” who cuts the wrong person off in traffic gets followed home on a livestream and shamed into crying for mercy as her license plate is broadcast to an online horde eager to hound her out of a job.

Everyone knows it can happen to them, so everyone shuts down. The circle of trust narrows. Conversations — too easily recorded — shift to encrypted messaging apps. For now. Until those get banned too for interfering in efficient social credit markets.

For some time, conservatives, recognizing that we’re now the counterculture, indulged in the delusion that we could opt out of all this. We’d send our kids to schools that don’t teach all the woke stuff. We’d make our friends at church, not at work, and take comfort that trust and openness were still possible in communities of shared purpose. We’d vote our conscience, because the ballot box was something no election could take from us.

And if ever our political organizing were impeded by censorship — say, by the big tech giants — we could build our own platforms.

But the left and the corporations are challenging all of this now. Your “conservative” social platform isn’t worth much when Amazon can shut it down. Your vote may still be yours, but if your party is denied the means to effectively organize by corporate monopolies, it’s not going to win. Your church, well, you can still attend for now, but go to the wrong church and you may not have a job in a few years.

Here’s the good news. The cancel culture agenda will only succeed if we let it. We need live in fear only if we choose to say nothing. In this time of testing, conservatives must not shrink back. We need to stand up for the right of every American to be heard.

We need to stand up for the basic principles that join all Americans together — the right to speak freely, to debate openly, and to address our differences graciously without fear of being silenced or punished for dissenting views.

I for one am not going to back down. My book will be published, and I will continue to represent the people of my state without fear or favor, whatever the left or the corporations say.

The powerful see in the present moment an opportunity to consolidate their control over society and to squelch dissent. That means those who believe in the First Amendment and the fundamental principles of American liberty must now take a stand, while we still can.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Liberal authoritarians like John Brennan are real threat to democracy

By David Harsanyi
January 24, 2021 | 8:12pm | Updated
Former CIA Director John Brennan testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, before the House Intelligence Committee Russia Investigation Task Force

Former CIA Director John Brennan testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, before the House Intelligence Committee Russia Investigation Task Force in May 2017.AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File

Every time former CIA Director John Brennan appears on cable news to warn about some new “insidious threat to democracy,” I am reminded again that he deserves to be in federal prison.

In this corrupt media environment, however, the official who oversaw an illegal domestic-spying operation on the legislative branch of the US government, who tried to cover it up and blame innocent Senate staffers when discovered and who then brazenly lied about it to legislators and the American people — this man is held up as a paragon of civic virtue.

We still don’t even know what role Brennan played in spying on his political opponents during the 2016 campaign. We do know he went on TV for years after, alleging to have insider knowledge of an unprecedented seditious criminal conspiracy against the United States. Never once was he challenged by his hosts.

And when an independent multimillion-dollar investigation couldn’t pull together a single indictment related to those claims, Brennan shrugged it off by saying that he may have “received bad information.”

Brennan was back on MSNBC last week, contending American intel agencies “are moving in laser-like fashion to try to uncover as much as they can about” the pro-Trump “insurgency” that harbors “religious extremists, authoritarians, fascists, bigots, racists, nativists, even libertarians.”

Even a former Communist such as Brennan surely understands there is nothing prohibiting Americans from being religious extremists, fascists, bigots, racists, nativists or even libertarians. It’s definitely none of his business, or that of intelligence agencies, to define what those terms mean. (And the idea that libertarians, who can’t get a minyan to agree on anything libertarian, are marshaling forces for a national insurgency is nonsensical.)

As Brennan is a congenital liar, this may well be another one of his convenient fictions. Yet, considering his history of abusing power we shouldn’t entirely dismiss the idea that his allies are ferreting out thought crimes.

Finding those who illegally threaten others with violence is well within the bailiwick of the government. But the Capitol riot has given authoritarians such as Brennan the pretext to advocate the chilling of speech.

It has become normalized, even celebrated. Networks such as CNN employ full-time anti-speech advocates who pump out cynical content meant to shame tech carriers into taking their competition off the air.

“Extremists exploit a loophole in social moderation: Podcasts on Apple, Google,” reports Tali Arbel for The Associated Press. Are Americans who express their political views on the Internet really abusing a “loophole,” or are Big Tech companies who censor them at the behest of the powerful abusing a “loophole” in the First Amendment?

Only in the kicker does Arbel quote Jillian York of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, who warns that the tide of censorship “is against the speech of right-wing extremists . . . but tomorrow the tide might be against opposition activists.” The problem is that censors never believe they’ll lose power, and maybe this time they’re right.

Those who rationalize state censorship almost always expand their definition of “extremist” to include their opponents. The Washington Post’s columnist Max Boot welcomed regime change by imploring the Biden administration to regulate those who supposedly incite radicalism, including Fox News.

Nicolle Wallace, Brennan’s MSNBC colleague, called for forcing Republicans to offer “the truth” before they’re “allowed” to say anything else. As we protect people from “counterfeit bills,” we can protect them against “fake news.”

What made Wallace’s comment especially surreal was that her guest was Ben Rhodes, the former Obama administration official who once bragged that he’d duped a bunch of dimwitted reporters into becoming his disinformation operation. Now Rhodes, too, seems interested in importing Iranian-style censorship with a “firm and brutal” “detox” of bad ideas, achieved through the “national security” officials.

I’m old-fashioned. I’d rather have a bunch of nuts ranting on podcasts all day than one John Brennan deciding what we can say. To my ears, Rhodes, Brennan, Wallace and Boot are the ones who sound like a threat to “democracy.”
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Joe Biden: America Is a “Nation of Morally Deprived” People Who Are “Less Prosperous” Due to Systemic Racism (Video)

By Jim Hoft
Published January 26, 2021 at 1:49pm
joe-biden-confused.jpg

Don’t you just love Democrats? With all of their self-hatred and rage packaged up to smear and berate the people they claim to represent.
Joe Biden delivered remarks on racial equality on Tuesday.

Only 2,200 tuned in to watch this painful speech on the YouTube White House Channel.

That was probably best.
biden-2.2-k-racial.jpg


It was painful to watch Joe Biden slur his words as he mumbled through his remarks.

It was also painful to hear Joe Biden and the anti-American left accuse all Americans of being a “nation of morally deprived” people.
Joe Biden: I believe we are in a battle for the soul of this nation. And the simple truth is our soul be troubled as long as systemic racism is allowed to persist. We can’t eliminate ‘zimply’ overnight. We can’t ‘eliminateverthing.’ But it’s corrosive, it’s destructive and it’s costly. It costs every American. Not just who felt the sting of racial injustice. We’re not just less of a – We’re not just a nation of morally deprived because of systemic racism. We’re also less prosperous. We’re less successful. We’re less secure.
What a disgusting speech.

View: https://youtu.be/OM6qa7WgFoU
.44 min
 
Top