Over the past four years, President Biden has said that he did not know about, and did not benefit, from Hunter Biden’s business dealings.
BRIETBART has more on the exact dates these lies were spoke:
President Joe Biden “lied” at least 16 times about his family’s elaborate business schemes, the House Oversight Committee recounted Thursday.
The committee says Joe Biden lied in five different ways about his family’s foreign business endeavors:
1) That Joe Biden never spoke to his family about their business dealings; 2) His family did not receive $1 million through a third party; 3) Hunter Biden never made money in China; 4) Hunter Biden’s dealings were ethical; 5) and his son did nothing wrong.
This is a bit of a FLASHBACK PIVOT, but one worth making as it leads into a new talking point. Remember, the previous lkie told to get Biden across the finish line was that the laptop was Russian disinfo:
People familiar with the investigation said prosecutors had examined emails between Mr. Biden, Mr. Archer and others about Burisma and other foreign business activity. Those emails were obtained by The New York Times from a cache of files that appears to have come from a laptop abandoned by Mr. Biden in a Delaware repair shop. The email and others in the cache were authenticated by people familiar with them and with the investigation.
In confirming that federal prosecutors are treating as “authenticated” the Biden emails, the Times story applies the final dollop of clown makeup to Wolf Blitzer, Lesley Stahl, Christiane Amanpour, Brian Stelter, and countless other hapless media stooges, many starring in Matt Orfalea’s damning montage above (the Hunter half-laugh is classic, by the way). All cooperated with intelligence officials to dismiss a damaging story about Biden’s abandoned laptop and his dealings with the corrupt Ukrainian energy company Burisma as “Russian disinformation.” They tossed in terms thought up for them by spooks as if they were their own thoughts, using words like “obviously” and “classic” and “textbook” to describe “the playbook of Russian disinformation,” in what itself was and still is a wildly successful disinformation campaign, one begun well before the much-derided (and initially censored) New York Post exposé on the topic from October of 2020…..
Now that it has been confirmed, Democrat politicians and the MSM have switched gears, saying, that there is no evidence that Biden benefited from these [now proven] transactions. Let me re-word it how the MSM and Dems do:
“NO DIRECT EVIDENCE OF BENEFIT.”
BREITBART again notes this newest pivot by Dems and media:
….After Devon Archer, Hunter Biden’s best friend in business, testified Monday before the House Oversight Committee, Democrats and members of the media used a joint talking point to try to discredit his testimony.
Archer told House investigators that then-Vice President Joe Biden spoke on speakerphone over 20 times with Hunter Biden’s business associates to promote the Biden “brand.”
Breitbart News reported that Archer’s testimony produced evidence implicating Joe Biden in a bribery scheme in which a foreign company paid Hunter Biden in return for use of the Biden “brand.”
“House GOP members continue to try and link Hunter’s business dealings to the president, though they have yet to produce any concrete evidence,” NBC News’ Today morning show claimed. “Now it is important to keep in mind while Republicans believe that there is a tie between Hunter Biden’s business dealings and the president himself, they have yet to provide any hard evidence that the president himself has done anything wrong.”
“Republicans have not tied the president, Joe Biden, to profiteering from them,” MNSBC reported. “They didn’t have the evidence yet.”
“Where’s the evidence?” Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-PA) asked on CNN. “There is no evidence of any wrongdoing by the President.”
“There is today zero evidence — zero evidence — that Joe Biden, the president United States, knew about what his son was doing,” Rep. Jim Himes (D-CT) claimed.
“And if the President of the United States committed the kind of offenses that in the Republican fever dreams they’re saying he committed without any evidence,” he continued, “there is at this point zero evidence that Joe Biden is guilty of anything. What the Republicans are doing, of course, is they’re just very, very angry that their guy got impeached twice, and so they’re just casting about for a way of revisiting retribution on the Democrats and this is their latest fever dream.”
“Nothing shady is going on with Hunter Biden and his overseas business.”
“Hunter’s laptop is Russian disinformation.”
“Okay, the laptop is real but it doesn’t prove anything.”
Professor Turley make the most salient point when discussing the Democrats position:
“Being a crook doesn’t mean you’re a moron, and it would take a moron to do a direct deposit into an account to the Biden family or send him some Zelle transfer. It’s not done. The Bidens are very good at this,”
George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley said that the media and Democrats were offering “ridiculous” excuses about bribery allegations involving Hunter Biden.
“The media is now acknowledging that, sure, Hunter Biden was selling influence and access but it was an illusion and there’s no proof that Joe Biden got an envelope full of money or a direct deposit to his account; therefore, there’s nothing here,” Turley told Fox News host Laura Ingraham. “Democrats have constantly said stop asking questions because you don’t have that type of direct evidence of benefits. Well, that’s just ridiculous. I mean, obviously, all of these payments benefit Joe Biden. It’s going to the Biden family fund.”
“Being a crook doesn’t mean you’re a moron, and it would take a moron to do a direct deposit into an account to the Biden family or send him some Zelle transfer. It’s not done. The Bidens are very good at this,” Turley said. “They have been in the influence peddling business for decades. There’s been articles, not just Hunter but the president’s brother openly selling his access according to critics, so they have been at this a long time.”
“Here’s the weird thing is that you have got this labyrinth of accounts, right? Two dozen different shell companies’ accounts that have no discernible pursuance except to hide the money transfers going to the Biden family and, yet Democrats are demanding the one thing that is the least likely to appear,” Turley added. “Despite that whole apparatus to transfer money, someone was giving a direct deposit slip to Joe and Jill Biden. I mean, how crazy is that? So we have to, I think, deal with the reality that this is what influence peddling is.”
Eric Schwerin, a former business partner of Hunter Biden who visited the White House at least 19 times during the Obama administration when President Joe Biden served as vice president, will testify before the House Oversight Committee, Republican Rep. James Comer told Fox Business host Larry Kudlow earlier Thursday.
Remember, Democrats challenged more states electors in 2016 with the election of President Trump in 2020, which is that in 2017 Democrats challenged nine state’s electors and in 2021 Republicans challenged six state’s electors:
…In the 2016 presidential election, Trump won 304 electoral votes to Hillary Clinton‘s 227. During the joint session on January 6, 2017, seven House Democrats tried to object to electoral votes from multiple states.
According to a C-SPAN recording of the joint session that took place four years ago, the following House Democrats made objections:
Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) objected to Alabama’s votes.
Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) objected to Florida’s votes.
Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) objected to Georgia’s votes.
Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.) objected to North Carolina’s votes.
Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) objected to the votes from North Carolina in addition to votes from South Carolina and Wisconsin. She also stood up and objected citing “massive voter suppression” after Mississippi’s votes were announced.
Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) brought up allegations of Russian interference in the election and malfunctioning voting machines when she objected following the announcement of Michigan’s votes.
Maxine Waters (D-Calif) rose and said, “I do not wish to debate. I wish to ask ‘Is there one United States senator who will join me in this letter of objection?'” after the announcement of Wyoming’s votes.
In 2017, House Democrats objected to votes from Alabama, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Wisconsin. Objections also were made after the announcement of votes from Mississippi, Michigan and Wyoming, adding up to nine states. None of the nine objections was considered because they lacked the signature of a senator.
In total, Republicans made objections to votes from six states: Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. By the end of the joint session, Biden’s 306 electoral votes were certified, just as Trump’s votes had been certified in 2017….
The NEW YORK TIMES notes the following about the Democrats 21st century strategy:
…Few objections were filed in accordance with the Electoral Count Act in the 20th century. But starting with George W. Bush’s victory in the 2000 presidential election, Democrats contested election results after every Republican win.
In January 2001, Representative Alcee Hastings of Florida objected to counting his state’s electoral votes because of “overwhelming evidence of official misconduct, deliberate fraud, and an attempt to suppress voter turnout.” Representative Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas referred to the “millions of Americans who have been disenfranchised by Florida’s inaccurate vote count.” Representative Maxine Waters of California characterized Florida’s electoral votes as “fraudulent.”
Vice President Al Gore presided over the meeting in 2001. He overruled these objections because no senator joined them. Part of the reason they didn’t join, presumably, was that Mr. Gore conceded the election a month earlier.
In January 2005, in the wake of Mr. Bush’s re-election, Democrats were more aggressive. Senator Barbara Boxer of California joined Representative Stephanie Tubbs Jones of Ohio to lodge a formal objection to Ohio’s electoral votes. The objection compelled Congress to spend two hours in debate, even though Mr. Bush won Ohio by more than 118,000 votes.
Representative Barbara Lee of California claimed that “the Democratic process was thwarted.” Representative Jerrold Nadler of New York said that the right to vote was “stolen.” Ms. Waters objected too, dedicating her objection to the documentary filmmaker Michael Moore, whose 2004 movie “Fahrenheit 9/11” painted a dark (and at times factually debatable) picture of the Bush presidency.
The motion failed, but not before 31 members of the House, and Ms. Boxer in the Senate, voted to reject Ohio’s electoral votes — effectively voting to disenfranchise the people of Ohio in the Electoral College.
In January 2017, after Donald Trump’s victory, Democrats in Congress once again challenged the election outcome. Representative Jim McGovern of Massachusetts cited “the confirmed and illegal activities engaged by the government of Russia.” Ms. Lee of California argued that Michigan’s electoral votes should be thrown out because “people are horrified by the overwhelming evidence of Russian interference in our elections.” She also cited “the malfunction of 87 voting machines.”
There were objections against the votes in at least nine states. To his credit, Vice President Joe Biden rejected each objection on procedural grounds, stating that “there is no debate” and “it is over.”
Then as now, each member of Congress was within his or her rights to make an objection. But the objections were naïve at best, shameless at worst. Either way, the readiness of members of Congress to disenfranchise millions of Americans was disconcerting…..
The NYT article went on to say Hillary conceded, but so did Trump — as much as Hillary did:
“Rigged” Election Claims | Trump 2020 vs Clinton 2016
GATEWAY PUNDIT did what I wanted to do… and GP notes the following: “…Hillary Clinton lost more electors than any politician in the last 100 years. Not since 1912 has a candidate lost more electors.” The Final Count:
8 Clinton defectors
4 WA (successful)
1 HI (successful)
1 MN (attempted)
1 ME (attempted)
1 CO (attempted)
2 Trump defectors
Gateway Pundit goes on to list past “unfaithful electors” of the past, a great summary of our history in this regard, here’s the list:
The popular belief was that many electorates were going to defect (called, “unfaithful”) from Trump. In the end, more “unfaithful electorates” defected from Hillary Clinton than from Donald Trump. I find this HILARIOUS! Why? Because Trump even came out a winner in this arena as well. As Powerline notes, only two electors were “unfaithful” to Trump. Four ignored Clinton’s win in their states. In fact, there would have been more unfaithful electorates for Hillary if state law didn’t prohibit it, like the “chaos” over state rules in Colorado:
Katie Phang is still [April 2023] saying that Trump stole the election!
DEMOCRATS WERE FOR CHALLENGING ELECTORS BEFORE BEING AGAINST IT
The last three times a Republican has been elected president — Trump in 2016 and George W. Bush in both 2000 and 2004 — Democrats in the House have brought objections to the electoral votes in states the GOP nominee won. In early 2005 specifically, Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., along with Rep. Stephanie Tubbs, D-Ohio, objected to Bush’s 2004 electoral votes in Ohio.
Over the past 20 years, Democrats have on three separate occasions objected to the validity of electoral votes on the floor of Congress. Wednesday, Jan. 6, will mark the first time Republicans choose do so in the past two decades.
My sons and I have discussed the January 6th issues, and, some historical aspects as well. Firstly, people saying Trump should be impeached are just as radical as the people breaking into the Capital. The throwing around of the “sedition” label is funny, and shows how people are not aware of the recent history of the lawful process of debate in Congress about just such topic. Here is one blogger noting Chuck Todd’s biased lack of awareness:
…NBC host Chuck Todd, who is always in the running to overtake CNN’s Brian Stelter as the dumbest newsman in the news media, had it out with Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) over a number of Republican members of Congress who are planning to dispute the certification of Joe Biden winning the 2020 election due to questions of massive election fraud.
After being accused of trying to thwart the democratic process, Johnson hit back by telling sleepy eyes Todd that they are trying to protect it.
“We are not acting to thwart the democratic process, we are acting to protect it,” Johnson said to Todd.
Todd and others in the Fake News media are acting like the Republicans contesting the election results is an unprecedented affair.
Let me remind them that the last three times a Republican won a presidential election the Democrats in the House brought objections to the Electoral votes the Republican won.
Lest they forget that the House Democrats contested both elections of former President George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004 and President Trump’s win in 2016.…
PJ-MEDIA however has an excellent notation of this history when they point out Democrats outrage that Republicans objected to the certification of electoral votes. “It’s ‘conspiracy and fantasy,’ says Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.” PJ further states,
“The effort by the sitting president of the United States to overturn the results is patently undemocratic,” the New York Democrat said. “The effort by others to amplify and burnish his ludicrous claims of fraud is equally revolting.”
“This is America. We have elections. We have results. We make arguments based on the fact and reason—not conspiracy and fantasy,” he added.
There’s only one problem with Chucky’s “argument based on fact and reason.” Democrats have been challenging the electoral vote certification for two decades.
The last three times a Republican has been elected president — Trump in 2016 and George W. Bush in both 2000 and 2004 — Democrats in the House have brought objections to the electoral votes in states the GOP nominee won. In early 2005 specifically, Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., along with Rep. Stephanie Tubbs, D-Ohio, objected to Bush’s 2004 electoral votes in Ohio.
Illinois Senator Dick Durbin appears to be even more incensed at Senator Josh Hawley’s plan to object to the Electoral College vote.
“The political equivalent of barking at the moon,” Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said of Hawley joining the challenge to electoral slates. “This won’t be taken seriously, nor should it be. The American people made a decision on Nov. 3rd and that decision must and will be honored and protected by the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives.”
Brave Sir Dick seems to forget he was singing a different tune in 2005. Then, it was Democrats questioning the results of the Ohio vote, which went narrowly for George Bush.
Durbin had words of praise for Boxer then:
“Some may criticize our colleague from California for bringing us here for this brief debate,” Durbin said on the Senate floor following Boxer’s objection, while noting that he would vote to certify the Ohio electoral votes for Bush. “I thank her for doing that because it gives members an opportunity once again on a bipartisan basis to look at a challenge that we face not just in the last election in one State but in many States.”
In fact, the Ohio electoral vote challenge was only the beginning. Rumors and conspiracy theories swirled around the outcome on election night that saw Bush winning Ohio by a close, but the surprisingly comfortable margin of 120,000 votes. So why are so many of these headlines familiar to us today?
And a damning, resurfaced video underscores what’s already on the public record.
The video is a compilation of clips from congressional sessions following the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections, both won by Republican George W. Bush — and in the clips Democrats launched protests against Bush’s electoral votes.
That wasn’t all. The Washington Post reported that during the January 2001 session, words such as “fraud” and “disenfranchisement” were heard above Republicans calling for “regular order.”
More from the paper:
The Democratic protest was led by Black Caucus members who share the feeling among black leaders that votes in the largely African American precincts overwhelmingly carried by [then-Democratic presidential nominee Al] Gore were not counted because of faulty voting machines, illicit challenges to black voters and other factors.
“It’s a sad day in America,” Rep. Jesse L. Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.) said as he turned toward Gore. “The chair thanks the gentleman from Illinois, but . . . ” Gore replied.
At the end of their protest, about a dozen members of the Black Caucus walked out of the House chamber as the roll call of the states continued.
Another gun-related tragedy hit America over the weekend, this time outside a mall in Allen, Texas. And, unsurprisingly, the reaction from politicians and media pundits turned political almost immediately. In fact, despite not presenting evidence to the public, some are now reporting the killer was a white supremacist. But can we trust what the government and the media tell us? And if the gun is to blame me for this shooting, then what about the car that took just as many lives in Brownsville? And why is the media already releasing information about the Allen, TX shooter, but we still know very little about the ones in Las Vegas and Nashville? Glenn and Stu discuss all this, plus more…
PJ-MEDIA adds to the questioning of the “evidence” in this post:
….An anonymous Twitter account (with a paid-for blue check) with the handle Insurrection Barbie put all the mysteries together in bullet points:
praised the trans shooter who shot up the christian school
has a social media account on a Russian website (wtf)
loves Hitler but also a fan and follower of Libs of Tik Tok, who btw is Jewish
hates LGBTQIA but he shot up an outlet mall, which is a place that typically has housewives and families
he was not targeting anyone he just shot at whoever was in range
obtained his weapon illegally if he was in fact dishonorably discharged
Neo Nazi white supremacist who is not white
We’re left with lots of questions but few answers, despite all the information that’s been made available so quickly.
I’d just add that we were told an awful lot about the Texas shooter’s motivations within 48 hours of his crimes but we still aren’t allowed to see the Tennessee trans shooter’s manifesto nearly two months after she murdered six.
If you need me, I’ll be watching YouTube videos on how to fashion a functioning tinfoil hat…..
Olson had 68 surgically diminished girls fill out her “novel” scale (which she acknowledged could be bogus) between one and five years after their surgery. Thirty-three of these girls were under 18 at the time of surgery. Two were only 13 years old, and five were only 14. Assuming these mastectomies weren’t all performed by the same very busy surgeon, that means there are multiple doctors out there willing to mutilate underage girls. (FEDERALIST)
Although there was a lack of information in the study regarding irreversible sex change procedures on minors, the study found some surgeries, like chest reconstruction, were increasing. Between 2016 and 2019, an estimated 1,130 chest reconstruction surgeries were performed on children under the age of 18, according to the study. (DAILY CALLER)
This is just one example (hat-tip to John Davidson) of the many regarding “pop-medicine” driven by culture (much like lobotomies). It is a fad that harms and destroys lives permanently. (Click graphic to enlarge)
People who formerly identified as transgender and took cross-sex hormones or underwent transgender surgery have later come to regret their transitions and the serious damage they did to their own bodies, urged on by the medical establishment. On March 12, the Detrans day of awareness, these detransitioners have come forward to tell their stories.
“I experienced transition regret. I had injected testosterone for four and a half years, I underwent a double mastectomy, only to very gradually realize over time that I had made a massive mistake and wanted to detransition,” Sinead Watson, one of the organizers of the Twitter campaign #DetransAwarenessDay, said in a YouTube video.
“The people who experience transition regret are subject to an utterly undeserved stigma. We’re very often bullied, and insulted, and silenced whenever we try to share our experiences online, and it’s because people who discuss transition regret are often accused of having our stories and our experiences weaponized to harm our trans brothers and sisters. That’s not what I want,” Watson added.
Watson clarified, “We don’t want to take health care away from trans people. We want the improvement of care for people with gender dysphoria.” She acknowledged that transition has helped many people, but she insisted that “there are also a growing number of people who went through medical transition who deeply regret it, who were harmed by it, physically and mentally, and we deserve the right to talk about our experiences, just as much as someone who doesn’t regret it has a right to talk about their experiences.”
She insisted that people who suffer from transition regret are terrified to speak out because “they will be insulted, they will be laughed at, they will be mocked… they will be told they’re hateful.”
She argued that the medical community pushes medical transition as a one-size-fits-all approach to gender dysphoria (the persistent and painful condition of identifying with the gender opposite one’s biological sex), but not everyone who suffers from gender dysphoria needs medical transition. She suggested there should be a broad array of different treatment options.
Watson partnered with Keira Bell, a 23-year-old woman who was put on experimental so-called “puberty blockers” after having been referred to a British transgender clinic at age 16. Late last year, Britain’s High Court ruled in Bell’s case that young teenagers could not consent to life-altering transgender treatments. The two detransitioners teamed up with Detrans Voices, Detrans Canada, and Post Trans, to support #DeTransAwarenessDay.
“Detrans day of awareness (12th March) was created to raise awareness and break down the stigma around detransition,” Watson, Bell, and the organizations said in a statement. “We want to let other people who have detransitioned know that they are not alone. There is a flourishing community of detransitioned people who are finding peace, healing and fulfillment as they are.”
A woman who identifies herself as “Helena,” a 22-year-old “detrans gender apostate,” posted photos of herself before and after her detransition.
“I identified as trans for 5 years, and took testosterone for 17 months. I began detransitioning [in] February 2018. [Transitioning] was a way to cope with my trauma and body hatred. 3 years later i’m thankful to TRULY live authentically, no longer running from myself,” she wrote.
Medical Expert: Doctors Are Actually Giving Trans Kids a Disease, and It’s Child Abuse (PJ-MEDIA, Aug 2019)
“I transitioned FtM with testosterone injections and a double-mastectomy,” a detransitioner named Grace shared on Twitter, showing pictures from before and after her detransition. “It was a bandaid for deeper pain, and I regret it. Detransition was humbling and healing for me. I’m so glad to have found hard-won peace and acceptance for myself as a woman.”
PJ-MEDIAnotes a new study on the great ability of marijuana to make one stupid:
….Weed today is, on average, five or six times as potent as the stuff the hippies smoked back in the ’60s and ’70s. In 1972, the average THC content in most marijuana in the United States was 3% to 4%. Today’s pot commonly has a THC content of 20% or more. Additionally, the percentage of the compound CBD has decreased, which experts say can increase the overall effect of the more potent grass.
Note that I’m not here to bash the positive results many have had from treating chronic issues with medicinal herb but to remind everyone that getting high all the time for no reason is dumb. Don’t be a lotus-eater.
Yesterday, NBC News highlighted a recent study that shows that not only does smoking pot impair numerous mental functions of the user, but these effects can linger for weeks after use has stopped. The Canadian study was one of those meta-reviews that analyzes data from multiple existing scientific studies to discover overarching trends. What it found was that, every time someone gets high, they can be dumber for weeks. Hardest hit was the ability to learn from what one hears and to remember things. So, for example, if you told your drummer to be at your house for rehearsal on Thursday night, not only would he have trouble understanding what that meant, he would probably forget it even if he did. Also particularly affected is the stoner’s ability to focus or pay attention and to process information. Smaller deficits were also recorded for executive functioning, decision-making, inhibitory processes, and flexibility.
“Although acute intoxication can last several hours, research has revealed that THC is a fat-soluble compound that may be stored in body fat and, thus, gradually released into the bloodstream for months,” say the scientists. “Indeed, studies have shown impaired cognition that persists beyond the acute intoxication period in both adult and adolescent cannabis users,” they write. The more heavy the use, the more pronounced the effects, but even someone who only smokes weed once every week or two could still be consistently impaired. Most of us have a hard enough time keeping up; why on earth would anyone choose to jettison an extra couple dozen IQ points?
And not only does pot make people stupid, but it can also make them crazy. This is particularly true among heavy users and younger users whose brains are still forming. Narcanon notes that chronic use of today’s super-jacked weed can induce panic attacks, paranoia, wild mood swings, fragmented thoughts, depersonalization (losing one’s sense of identity), and straight-up psychosis. A 2017 study published in the journal Neuropharmacology ties youthful marijuana use to increased onset of severe mental illnesses:
Prospective epidemiological studies have consistently demonstrated that cannabis use is associated with an increased subsequent risk of both psychotic symptoms and schizophrenia-like psychoses. Early onset of use, daily use of high-potency cannabis, and synthetic cannabinoids carry the greatest risk. The risk-increasing effects are not explained by shared genetic predisposition between schizophrenia and cannabis use…..
So here we are, after another shooting but one seemingly that truly targets minorities.
Three additional POINTS/UPDATES I believe are worthy via TWITCHY and the LIBERTY DAILY. And the first is made by CHICKS ON THE RIGHT, and is made often by common sense thinkers. Which is, if everything is racist, nothing is racist:
We have reached peak absurdity. The word means nothing anymore. The left has devalued the term to the point that it has no power — and those wielding it are worthy only of ridicule. (AMERICAN THINKER)
When everything is racist, nothing is. When every single thought, act, landmark, cultural touchstone, and tradition are defamed as “white supremacy,” regardless of origin or context and irrespective of fact, the term “racism” has lost all meaning. (RED AS HELL)
If you think everything you don’t like is racist, then of course the election of a president you don’t like has to be racist. (NEW YORK POST)
The word “racism” is no longer a description, and hasn’t been for some time. Now it’s simply a political tool with no meaning. The word doesn’t need context to be used, and you need not worry about dissecting nuance in order to toss it around. Just find something you don’t like and apply liberally. No pun intended. (RED STATE)
And so, even though this was a young man in his boredom influenced by white supremacism and socialism… meh. People like Chicago Mayor think they are changing the world with stunts like these, while, her fellow brothers and sisters die in droves. Sad.
And here is another wonderful observation made as well:
So here are the early discussions of his manifesto (CD MEDIA):
The Buffalo shooter published a manifesto which showed support for the same symbols used by the Nazi Azov Battalion in Ukraine. He also expressed hatred for those against US military involvement in the Ukraine conflict.
In other words, he supported the globalist agenda in Ukraine and showed sympathy for Nazi elements in-country.
He also expressed hatred for Fox News, which is opposite what mainstream reporting is putting out.
“On the political compass I fall in the mild-moderate authoritarian left category…”
In other words…. what CD MEDIA is pointing out flies in the face of comments like these:
Three things. One, Joe Lockhart (and others) either “a” doesn’t know tucker Carlson’s position on this issue… or “b” is saying because Tucker opposed the U.S. financial support of the war in Ukraine — THIS opposition drove the shooter to kill people? At any rate, the Left often does not know that which it speaks of. Or “c” people like this just see an opportunity to attack conservative’s and FOX NEWS that they use lies to do it.
Here for instance is some input on Tucker’s position from the LEFTIEsite, Crooks and Liars headline:
Tucker Wants Republicans Who Voted For Ukraine Aid Primaried: Continuing his support of Russia, the Fox News host denounced all Republicans that vote and will vote to approve aid to Ukraine.
Of course Crooks and Liars misapply Tucker’s position… but the point is that Tucker (and FOX NEWS) was hated by the shooter because of their position of skepticism about the monies spent there and not domestically in our country.
Many conservatives I follow disagree with the funding of the war in Ukraine. For instance, Daniel Horowitz notes the reason in one of his bullet points as follows:
Where are the money and arms going, and how are they not going toward the neo-Nazi Azov brigade that will, in the small chance they defeat the Russians, continue persecuting the ethnic Russians and fuel an intermittent conflict with Russia in perpetuity? (THE BLAZE)
Soo, as any National Socialist, he see Jews EVERYWHERE. And much like the Left, hates Mr. Murdoch.
And the shooter also said he was influennced, not by TV, but by the interwebs:
Before I begin I will say that I was not born racist nor grew up to be racist. I simply became racist after I learned the truth. started browsing 4chan in May 2020 after extreme boredom…. From there, I also found other sites, like worldtruthvideos […] dailyarchives […] dailystormer…
Just as physicists look for equations to explain the natural world, I have always thought it useful to look for equations to explain human nature. For example, in my book on happiness, I offer this equation: U = I – R. Unhappiness = Image – Reality. The difference between the images we have for our life and the reality of our life is one way of measuring how much unhappiness we experience.
Here, I offer another theorem, this time to help explain leftism.
A + S = B = L
Affluence + Secularism = Boredom = Leftism
The search for an equation to help explain leftism (as distinguished from traditional liberalism) emanates from these facts:
Most leftists come from the upper and upper-middle class. This was true for the two founders of leftism, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Marx was supported by his family and by Engels, who was a wealthy businessman and the son of a very wealthy businessman. All the Western spies for the Soviet Union were economically secure. And the great funder of radical causes today is a billionaire — George Soros.
Nearly all leftists are irreligious people. And the breeding place of leftism, the university, is the most secular institution in modern society.
These two facts produce a problem: Many people lack meaning in their lives. And lack of meaning is another way of stating “boredom” — a boredom of the soul.
People need meaning. After food, that is the greatest human need. As important as sex is, there are happy people who go without sex (loss of a partner, never having found a partner, vows of chastity), but there are no happy people who go without meaning (no matter how much sex they have).
This need for meaning has traditionally been met by four things: religion, family, providing for oneself and one’s family, and patriotism. And all are fading…..
Even Michael Cernovich (also hated by the Left) was noted by the killer to be a “Jew troll”
But as with our other shooters the Left claims to be right=-wing… they hold very far Left positions and politics. CHRISTINA PUSHAW notes after Cernovich’s Tweet:
“Authoritarian left wing” = National Socialist = Nazi.
(Click on graphic for an excellent, excellent article)
Tom Metzger: Director, White Aryan Resistance; Career Highlights: Was Grand Dragon of Ku Klux Klan in the 70s; won the Democratic primary during his bid for Congress in 1980…
Ron Edwards: Imperial Wizard, Imperial Klans of America; Career Highlights: Sued in 2007 by the Southern Poverty Law Center for inciting the brutal beating of a Latino teenager; building the IKA into one of the nation’s largest Klan groups by allowing non-Christians to join.
Erich Gliebe: Chairman, National Alliance; Career Highlights: Turning white-power record label, Resistance Records, into a million-dollar-a-year business juggernaut; an 8-0 record as a professional boxer under the nickname, “The Aryan Barbarian.”
Rocky Suhayda: Chairman, American Nazi Party; Career highlights: Being widely quoted bemoaning in the fact that so few Aryan-Americans had the cojones of the 9/11 hijackers: “If we were one-tenth as serious, we might start getting somewhere.”
….Later in the manifest, the shooter insists, “I would prefer to call myself a populist. But you can call me an ethno-nationalist eco-fascist national socialist if you want, I wouldn’t disagree with you.” He also repeatedly attacks capitalists, and rejected the conservative label because, he wrote, “conservativism is corporatism in disguise, I want no part of it.”
But let’s not pretend that, assuming the manifesto is legitimate, the rhetoric espoused in its pages means the shooter cannot be legitimately aligned with either major political party or political movement. While I would argue that the views expressed in the manifesto echo rhetoric of radical leftism, the manifesto is full of nonsense and garbage that is at times inconsistent. The people who were quick to exploit the situation to attack Fox News and conservatives were wrong and should be ashamed of themselves.
And RED STATE’S end to their post on this is good as well:
But hey, why wait for facts? The left never cared about facts in the past, why would they begin caring now? They don’t care about the tragedy and the people who died–except how they can use it to attack their political enemies, and that is despicable.
….That didn’t stop them from blaming Fox News, of course. Leftist narratives never get tripped up by pesky things like facts.
As we all know, Tucker Carlson has replaced Sean Hannity as Public Enemy Number One at Fox News for the left, so he was getting a lot of the blame too. In their telling, this kid’s warped brain was fully formed by Carlson.
More bad news on that from the manifesto:
A search of the entire manifesto also yields no mentions of Tucker Carlson and specifically mentions “the internet” as where he got his beliefs.
Putting the final nail in the “right-wing extremist” narrative coffin, Cray-Cray says he got into communism young, uses a variety of leftist labels to describe himself, and rejects conservatism.
The Black Sun has been symbolized and used by various alchemists and occultists for well over 500 years. As I explained in my article, Black Sun Rising, this symbol is also known as the “Invisible Sun” and called by its Latin name, Sol Niger, and the German Schwarze Sonne, and the Sonnenrad German for Sun Wheel.
High-ranking Nazi officials eventually chose the symbol of the Black Sun to symbolize the force or energy they would channel to spread their ideologies around the globe and conquer their enemies.
However, the Nazis would use a modified version of the symbol of the Black Sun (German: Schwarze Sonne), adding twelve radial sig runes rather than the Traditional symbology, which did not contain the sig runes up until that time.
It has been theorized that the development of the Nazi Black Sun symbology was due to several SS leaders who were very much deep into the occult and esoteric studies. People like Rudolph Hess, Wilhelm Landig, and Karl Maria Miligut whose research influenced Hitler’s #1 man, Heinrich Himmler, and the German National Socialist ideologies who used this unseen force to fuel their war campaigns.
The NAZI Black Sun first appeared in Nazi Germany during World War II in 1933 when Heinrich Himmler created the central meeting place and spiritual home for the Schutzstaffel (SS) at the Wewelsburg Castle…..
I haven’t posted these in a while, but I think in regard to the shooter’s manifesto where he calls himself an “authoritarian left winger and green nationalist” — I think Melanie Phillips (see her SUBSTACK for the latest in really good writing) seems appropriate right about now:
Ben Shapiro NOTES in his dealing with the below responses that if a 2-year old can answer the question, a Supreme Court nominee should be able to as well. To Wit, Justice Ginsburg is now considered “patriarchal” — my inference, but closer to the truth than this SCOTUS nominee:
…..With their relentless attack on gender, the left is denying reality as author George Orwell described through the characters in his novel,1984: “Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense.” It would therefore be heresy for Jackson to incorrectly define “woman” according to the radical left’s pre-approved definition (whatever that happens to be this week). While defining “woman” may on the surface seem commonsensical, it’s actually instrumental to the left’s ideology. “Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing,” wrote Orwell. If the left can force us to invalidate commonsense reality and replace it with their own, they can also hold all the power.
“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four,” Orwell wrote. “If that is granted, all else follows.” In other words, the left can’t allow ‘woman’ to be defined by the right as anything objective or provable. It must remain vague and subjective so that it can be defined in whatever malleable way benefits the left’s ideology and power. Or, as the Party in Orwell’s book put it, “You will be hollow. We shall squeeze you empty, and then we shall fill you with ourselves.”…..
I thought this was a good Tweet by Obianuju Ekeocha that makes a salient point, which is the patriarch has been right this entire time. Men AREbetter at everything…. although Miss Ekeocha didn’t express it in those terms. That is my interpretation:
Maybe the #MeeToo movement should be the #MeWho movement. A phrase that came out of that movement is this: “Believe Women”
What is a woman? — Biden’s SCOTUS pick, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson
Or how bout this trope?
“Women make 73 cents for every man’s dollar.”
So again the question is,
What is a woman? — Biden’s SCOTUS pick, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson
How about this: “women remain underrepresented in CEO positions.” You get the point.
Here is my comment on the above at 60-Minute’s YouTube:
This didn’t age well. Leslie Stahl was spreading misinformation. Works by Lee Smith, Gregg Jarrett, Dan Bongino, Molly Hemingway, John Solomon, Chuck Ross, and the like — had already proven Trump’s statement via the E V I D E N C E. What a disgrace to investigative journalism 60-Minutes has become. Another example why more ppl distrust news sources, and with a recent poll showing a majority of Democrats now want Hillary investigated… 60-M will lose more viewers.
Suffice to say “spying” has been known to have happened already through multiple channels:
Lawyers for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign paid a technology company to “infiltrate” servers that belonged to Trump Tower and, later, the Trump White House “for the purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump,” according to a motion filed Friday by Special Counsel John Durham. Fox News reports:
Durham filed a motion on Feb. 11 focused on potential conflicts of interest related to the representation of former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussman, who has been charged with making a false statement to a federal agent. Sussman has pleaded not guilty.
The indictment against Sussman says he told then-FBI General Counsel James Baker in September 2016, less than two months before the 2016 presidential election, that he was not doing work “for any client” when he requested and held a meeting in which he presented “purported data and ‘white papers’ that allegedly demonstrated a covert communications channel” between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank, which has ties to the Kremlin.
According to the Feb. 11 filing, in a section titled “Factual Background,” Sussman “had assembled and conveyed the allegations to the FBI on behalf of at least two specific clients, including a technology executive (Tech Executive-1) at a U.S.-based internet company (Internet Company 1) and the Clinton campaign.”
Billing records show that Sussman “repeatedly billed the Clinton Campaign for his work on the Russian Bank-1 allegations.”
Sources told Fox News that Sussman and Tech Executive-1 had also met and communicated with another law partner, Marc Elias, formerly of Perkins Coie, who also served as General Counsel to the Clinton campaign.
Durham’s filing states that in July 2016, the tech executive worked with Sussman, a U.S. investigative firm retained by Law Firm 1 on behalf of the Clinton campaign, numerous cyber researchers and employees at multiple internet companies to “assemble the purported data and white papers.”
“In connection with these efforts, Tech Executive-1 exploited his access to non-public and/or proprietary Internet data,” the filing states. “Tech Executive-1 also enlisted the assistance of researchers at a U.S.-based university who were receiving and analyzing large amounts of Internet data in connection with a pending federal government cybersecurity research contract.”
“Tech Executive-1 tasked these researchers to mine Internet data to establish ‘an inference’ and ‘narrative’ tying then-candidate Trump to Russia,” Durham states. “In doing so, Tech Executive-1 indicated that he was seeking to please certain ‘VIPs,’ referring to individuals at Law Firm-1 and the Clinton campaign.”…..
Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, weighs in on new evidence from the Durham investigation that the Clinton campaign paid to spy on and link Russia to President Trump.
Ratcliffe Predicts More Clinton-Related Indictments
Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe on the John Durham findings showing Hillary Clinton findings into the efforts to pin Russian collusion on Trump and his presidential campaign.
Hemingway: Durham Reveals Spying On Trump Was Worse Than Watergate
Bombshell Durham Report Finds Clinton Campaign Spied On Trump During Presidency
FOX Business Maria Bartiromo, Fox News Contributor Liz Peek and Michael Lee Strategy founder Michael Lee discuss the latest findings in the Durham report.
Gregg Jarrett & Peter Schweizer Respond to New Durham Info
Watters: ‘Criminal’ Clinton Should Be Banished From Polite Society
Jesse Watters comments on a filing from special counsel John Durham alleging the Clinton campaign paid money to penetrate Trump Tower servers and calls the former Democratic presidential candidate a ‘political criminal’ on ‘The Five.’
…which says that the current number of confirmed pediatric hospitalizations with COVID in the United States is 3,342.
Those are hospitalizations with COVID, not from COVID.
How exactly did Sotomayor get it so wrong? How can a Supreme Court justice so irresponsibly spread misinformation? Further, why should the hospitalization rate matter at all? The issue before the court is not the severity of the disease; it’s the constitutionality of Biden’s mandates.
THE CDC FACT CHECKED STATS
Even CNN forced to fact check Justice Sotomayor’s astonishingly false Covid lie…!!
RIGHT SCOOP adds to the data coming in showing that the Lefty SCOTUS members are either lying or horribly misinformed — maybe by CNN? MSNBC?
Sotomayor and Breyer lied through their teeth today about Covid. The media, when they aren’t ignoring this or saying the justices were RIGHT are claiming it was simply error or misspeak. But none of that is true, it was deliberate lying, like we see every day from their fellow activist liberal Democrats across the government and media, to include Fauci, Biden, and the rest.
And new hospital data from New York only shows how BAD of liars they are.
New York has its first official breakdown of what share of people are hospitalized for COVID vs. how many are hospitalized with incidental COVID. In NYC it’s 49% for COVID, everyone else just happened to test positive. pic.twitter.com/fNUmMK2DM9
That’s right. So much for the “overwhelming hospitals” line of bull. If ICUs are full it’s because of procedure, not people coming in due to covid. And that means it’s not a “pandemic of the unvaccinated” too, by the way.
She’s right. This was treated as a conspiracy theory for TWO YEARS and now we know it to be FACT.
Two articles I want to get onto my site… and the first one about Africa I have used in the past… actually, Tokyo’s Medical Association Chairman (Haruo Ozaki) uses this information in his recommending to Japan to use Ivermectin. Here is my response from a conversation posted a while back:
Z.L., Ross T. has no idea what they are talking about. Nor does he actually step outside the boobtube to find out. Some African countries have handed out Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as well as Ivermectin yearly to it population. You can see these countries doing very well. This is part of the reason Tokyo’s Medical Association Chairman (Haruo Ozaki) recommends Ivermectin has again recommended it. He first recommended it in February, but just recently said Japan has not heeded his warning. (RPT: More Straight Talk About Covid-19 Prophylactics)
More on Africa:
…..Last year, health officials predicted millions would die in Africa from COVID, but instead, the continent has a death rate (161.26 per million population) lower than the world average (653.52 per million population), and Africa is described by the World Health as being “one of the least affected regions in the world” in its weekly pandemic reports.
According to a recent report from the Associated Press, COVID-19 seems to have become a thing of the past. In Zimbabwe, for example, only 33 new cases and zero deaths were recorded last week.
A study published in April 2020 in the American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene warned that, “there is currently no evidence that CQ or HCQ, two low-cost drugs for which we have extensive experience for treatment of malaria and rheumatic disorders, has beneficial effects on the clinical course of COVID-19 patients,” and then warned that, “the off-label use of CQ and HCQ to prevent or treat COVID-19 in Africa and elsewhere must be viewed with greatest caution, considering potential serious toxicities and benefit versus risk. If the effectiveness of these and other drugs is established in global trials, therapeutics for COVID-19 will require further operational evaluation in Africa.”
Because of the high rates of malaria in Africa, CQ and HCQ are widely available there and have been used to treat malaria for decades. It’s a cheap, off-patent drug, that was unfortunately highly politicized in the early weeks of the pandemic because President Trump cited a study showing it was potentially a gamechanger in the fight against COVID.
Unfortunately, Democrats cared more about defeating Trump in the election than saving lives, and fueled hysteria against the drugs. Anyone touting the drug’s potential was silenced, including doctors. Many peer-reviewed studies have shown that HCQ contributes to less severe symptoms and lower mortality when administered early. Unfortunately, those studies were ignored while studies that claimed HCQ caused higher mortality were given wide coverage in the media… and some turned out to be bogus.
Imagine how many lives might have been saved had we really been “in this together” instead of so many being “in this to get Trump.”
According to a recent news story, “scientists are mystified” about the low numbers of COVID-19 cases and deaths in African countries: “Africa doesn’t have the vaccines and the resources to fight COVID-19 that they have in Europe and the U.S., but somehow they seem to be doing better.”
Interestingly, aside from confirming yet again that the vaccines don’t work, the African data also provide evidence supporting the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine. A new study by economists Hideki Toya and Mark Skidmore, which carefully controlled for other plausible contributing factors such as age distribution, healthcare capacity, and sunlight (exposure to which increases vitamin D levels), shows a convincing protective effect of hydroxychloroquine. While this is primarily an antimalarial drug, its antiviral properties have long been recognized. The same is true of ivermectin, which shows compelling activity against SARS-CoV-2 in vitro and also in vivo.
Note that the morbidity and mortality data analyzed by Toya and Skidmore are unaffected by vaccination rates, since they are from early 2020. You can read their study here: LIGHTHOUSE ECONOMICS
A Chicago-area judge saved a grandfather’s life with the single question that exposes hospitals blocking doctors from using a safe, FDA-approved drug: Why? (RESCUE with Michael Capuzzo)
Sun Ng, a retired contractor from Hong Kong, traveled to Illinois to celebrate his only granddaughter’s first birthday. He got covid and was near death in a Chicago-area hospital. All other options were exhausted, but the hospital refused to give Mr. Ng a generic, FDA-approved drug with an extraordinary safety record that a doctor believed could safe his life.
Finally, a judge asked the right question about ivermectin.
“What’s the downside?”
Put another way: If a man is dying of covid in an ICU and all else has been tried, why not order a hospital to give a safe, last-ditch drug?
Edward Hospital, located near Chicago, offered three arguments as to why Sun Ng, seventy-one, should not be given ivermectin:
There could be side effects.
Ordering ivermectin would violate its policies.
Forcing the issue would be “extraordinary” judicial overreach.
On each argument, DuPage County Circuit Court Judge Paul Fullerton firmly disagreed.
“I can’t think of a more extraordinary situation than when we are talking about a man’s life,” he said in a November 5 decision that is a model of rational decision-making in an irrational era.
“I am not forcing this hospital to do anything other than to step aside,” he continued in a Zoom hearing. “I am just asking—or not asking—I am ordering through the Court’s power to allow Dr. Bain to have the emergency privileges and administer this medicine.”
The hospital ultimately stepped aside. Dr. Alan Bain, an internist, administered a five-day course of 24 milligrams of ivermectin, from November 8 through November 12.
Ng, who with his wife, Ying, had come from Hong Kong to celebrate their granddaughter’s birthday, was able to breathe without a ventilator within five days—he, in fact, removed the endotracheal himself. He left the ICU Tuesday, November 16, and, although confused and weak, was breathing Sunday without supplemental oxygen on a regular hospital floor.
“Every day after ivermectin, there was accelerated and stable improvement,” said Dr. Bain, who administered the drug in two previous court cases after hospitals refused. “Three times we’ve shown something,” he told me. “There’s a signal of benefit for ventilator patients.”
Ng’s remarkable progress stands in sharp relief to the repeated attempts by Edward-Elmhurst Health, the hospital’s managing system, to thwart the use of ivermectin. It succeeded in having the court’s initial November 1 order dismissed by claiming Ng was in better health than his lawsuit contended (he wasn’t). It then defied the November 5 order, saying Dr. Bain was not vaccinated (a negative test resolved the issue).
Moreover, after Ng’s treatment was complete, the hospital system filed notice that it would appeal the order that had already been carried out. It did this even though Sun Ng seemed to have benefited greatly.
The patient’s improvement, or condition generally, did not seem to matter…..
Dr. Marik received his medical degree from the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa. Dr. Marik did Critical Care Fellowship in London, and Ontario, Canada. Dr. Marik has worked in various teaching hospitals in the USA, since 1992. He is a board certified in Internal Medicine, Critical Care Medicine, Neurocritical Care and Nutrition Science. Dr. Marik is currently Professor of Medicine and Chief of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Eastern Virginia Medical School in Norfolk, Virginia. Dr. Marik has written over 500 peer-reviewed papers and books, 43,000 scholarly citations of his work, and a research “H” rating higher than many Nobel Prize winners, 80 book chapters and authored four critical care books. He has been cited over 25,000 times in peer reviewed publications.
More heart issues confirmed with the mRNA vaccines:
Bad news about the dangers that mRNA vaccines may pose to the heart and blood vessels keeps coming.
A new study of 566 patients who received either the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines shows that signs of cardiovascular damage soared following the shots. The risk of heart attacks or other severe coronary problems more than doubled months after the vaccines were administered, based on changes in markers of inflammation and other cell damage.
Patients had a 1 in 4 risk for severe problems after the vaccines, compared to 1 in 9 before.
Dr. Steven Gundry, a Nebraska physician and retired cardiac surgeon, presented the findings at the Scientific Sessions of the American Heart Association’s annual conference in Boston last week. An abstract is available in Circulation, the AHA’s scientific journal……..
In this interview, Steve Kirsch, executive director of the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund, reviews some of the COVID jab data he’s presented to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention during various meetings.
Data suggest 1 in 317 boys aged 16 to 17 will get myocarditis from the COVID shots, and after a third booster, that number may be even higher
VAERS reporting is likely underreported by a factor of 41. Since there are over 8,000 domestic deaths reported to VAERS, and 98% of those deaths are “excess deaths,” this suggests that as many as 300,000 Americans may have died from the COVID shots thus far
Calculations based on government data from 35% of the world’s population suggest we’re killing approximately 411 people per million doses on average. Moderna and Pfizer are both two-dose regimens, which pushes this to 822 deaths per million fully vaccinated. And that’s just the short-term mortality. We still have no concept of how these shots might impact mortality and morbidity in the longer term
An Italian investigation found that if the COVID mortality definition were changed to only include those cases where there were no preexisting comorbidities, the mortality from COVID comes out to just 2.9% of the overall reported number. This suggests that if a COVID death was redefined to being a death actually “from” COVID rather than “with” COVID, the death count could be substantially smaller than 760,000 deaths and may be smaller than the number killed by the vaccines
The deadliest vaccine ever made is the smallpox vaccine, which killed 1 in 1 million vaccinated people. The COVID shots kills 822 per million fully vaccinated, making it more than 800 times deadlier than the deadliest vaccine in human history
In conversations on an anti-conspiracy website (which I am anti-conspiracy and have argued against vaccination conspiracies‘ at length as well), a video was posted that I found interesting and informative. I marked it at the 3:30’ish start to skip the pleasantries and allow for the beginning of the data comparisons. Enjoy:
Compare Confirmed Cases, Death, and Fully Vaccinated Rate From Singapore during First Wave and Second Wave (Current Wave):
Part of my contribution to to the recalling of this video is as follows:
Again, to be clear, as England is a month or more ahead of us, we use their numbers:
in England, of the 600,000 new cases of Delta, of the over 2,500 deaths, 63% of those deaths, 1,613 people, were the fully vaccinated. Twenty-eight percent were with the unvaxxed.”(PJ-MEDIA)*
I have yet to hear people give me an answer why this is… I have a response that explains it well, but this response is rejected in regard to the larger death toll, and is one used when needed to cover the tracks of those forcing vaccines [so-called] on people. For example, CDC Dir. Rochelle Walensky — when breakthrough cases were up-and-coming — noted that many of the 223 deaths “from Covid” she said were actually because of other illnesses. You see, when they want to pad numbers and skeptics say “well the numbers are inflated because these deaths would have happened anyways,” these common sense observations are rejected. But when the admin in charge wants to sweep stats under the rug, they borrow from arguments I have made since March 2020.
Not to mention the myriad of complications due to the Vaccines:
(GATEWAY PUNDIT) Jose Manriquez is a 7 year veteran of the Denver Police Department and a 12 year veteran of the Army National Guard but his most important job is taking care of his 4 children and being a loving husband, son, brother, and uncle. Manriquez was given the mandatory COVID vaccine required by the City of Denver. The mandatory mandate stated either get the vaccine or face termination from the job he loves so much!
Manriquez received the mandatory vaccine on August 22, 2021, and immediately started having a bad reaction. Since receiving the vaccine he has not been able to return to work and his future is uncertain. After receiving his vaccine he developed severe tremors and has trouble sleeping due to the amount of pain in his legs. He has fallen a number of times and basically can’t walk.
(GATEWAY PUNDIT)Jessica Berg Wilson, a young mother and “exceptionally healthy and vibrant 37-year-old with no underlying health conditions,” passed away from COVID Vaccine-Induced Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia.
This occurred after she took the COVID vaccine that she did not want.
According to her obituary at Oregon Live:
Jessica fully embraced motherhood, sharing her passion for life with her daughters. Jessica’s motherly commitment was intense, with unwavering determination to nurture her children to be confident, humble, responsible, and to have concern and compassion for others with high morals built on Faith.
Jessica’s greatest passion was to be the best mother possible for Bridget and Clara. Nothing would stand in her way to be present in their lives. During the last weeks of her life, however, the world turned dark with heavy-handed vaccine mandates. Local and state governments were determined to strip away her right to consult her wisdom and enjoy her freedom. She had been vehemently opposed to taking the vaccine, knowing she was in good health and of a young age and thus not at risk for serious illness. In her mind, the known and unknown risks of the unproven vaccine were more of a threat. But, slowly, day by day, her freedom to choose was stripped away. Her passion to be actively involved in her children’s education—which included being a Room Mom—was, once again, blocked by government mandate. Ultimately, those who closed doors and separated mothers from their children prevailed. It cost Jessica her life. It cost her children the loving embrace of their caring mother. And it cost her husband the sacred love of his devoted wife. It cost God’s Kingdom on earth a very special soul who was just making her love felt in the hearts of so many.
The family posted Jessica’s obituary at The Oregonian — But Twitter will not allow this information to be shared without a “misleading” label.
The social media giants are lying to the American public and people are dying.
A Public Health England Technical briefing released in September 2021 entitled “SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and variants under investigation in England” has some findings that do not bode well for vaccine supporters. The numbers show vaccinated people contracted and died of the so-called “Delta” variant of Coronavirus at a far greater rate than unvaccinated people between February 1, 2021 and September 12, 2021.
During the time period in question, unvaccinated people reportedly accounted for 257,357 Delta cases out of 593,572 total Delta cases (approximately 43 percent), and 722 out of 2,542 Delta deaths (approximately 28 percent) “within 28 days of positive specimen date.” What does that mean? It means that the vast majority of Delta deaths in England during this period occurred among vaccinated people, NOT unvaccinated people.
Here is Senator Ron Johnson’s presentation of this in-depth report:
More from PJ-MEDIA:
…On Thursday, Senator Ron Johnson (D-Wisc.) highlighted COVID data from outside of the United States. “The type of data we are not getting from our healthcare agencies,” he said, lamenting that “we have to look, unfortunately, to England and Israel,” which are being more transparent. The CDC has been accused of covering up the real numbers of breakthrough infections, which, if true, means that U.S. data isn’t very reliable. So, Senator Johnson first pointed to data from England.
“Now, President Biden – and this has been parroted by media and news media – said that what we are currently experiencing is a ‘pandemic of the unvaccinated’. They don’t really give us any data to back that up. They just proclaim, pronounce that 99 percent of people with Covid now are unvaccinated. But they don’t give us the data,” he explained. “Well, we have data from England, and here’s the data. So, of the 600,000 cases in England, 43% were the unvaxxed, 27% were with the fully vaxxed, another 30% were with partially vaxxed, or just undetermined.”
“Here is another quote from President Biden,” Johnson continued. “President Biden said, ‘if you’re vaccinated, you’re not going to be hospitalized. You’re not going to an ICU unit. You’re not going to die. You’re not going to get Covid, if you have these vaccinations’. Well, maybe that’s true in the U.S., I kind of doubt it. Because in England, of the 600,000 new cases of Delta, of the over 2,500 deaths, 63% of those deaths, 1,613 people, were the fully vaccinated. Twenty-eight percent were with the unvaxxed.”…
A group of moms calling themselves “Guerilla Momz” have released a video of Matt Meyer, Berkeley Federation of Teachers President, taking his own child to in-person private school while public school kids in his district sit at home. Parents are fed up with teachers’ unions refusing to open schools and now they’re doing something about it.
A statement by the group calls for the end of the hypocrisy.
Matt Meyer Berkeley Federation of Teachers President blocks opening public schools in-person, yet has had his own child in in-person school since June 2020. Stop the hypocrisy. Our children are suffering. Open schools full-time Now…..
Matt Meyer Berkeley Federation of Teachers President blocks opening public schools in-person, yet has had his own child in in-person school since June 2020. Stop the hypocrisy. Our children are suffering. Open schools full-time Now.
Authorization to use: To all news organizations and other parties, you have my permission to copy, use, and replay this video, provided you do not use my name or otherwise reveal my identity.
If you wish to interview someone from our group, DM @GuerillaMomz on Twitter Background of video: This video was taken on February 18th 2021 by a single person. Extract of Matt Meyer speech from BUSD school board meeting on January 20th.
I have always said that the Left are “totalitarians,” and that is because they want “total thought” — in other words, homogenized thinking through the filter of Leftism (race, class, sex: the “unholy trinitarian” goal of the Left). Here is the latest on this fight for societal freedom.
This is the excuse the totalitarians are looking for, PJ-MEDIA has a must read:
….While conservatives rightly denounced the violence this week, this response bodes ill for conservative speech not just on social media, but in the public square and even in private organizations.
In the aftermath of the Capitol riots, Twitter suspended President Donald Trump’s account for the first time and Facebook permanently banned the president. After Trump deleted the tweets Twitter had flagged and had his account restored, Twitter proceeded to ban him entirely on Friday, and then it banned the official President of the United States (POTUS) account.
House Democrats filed articles of impeachment that explicitly blame President Trump for the Capitol riots, even though he never told his supporters to invade the Capitol. While the president’s exaggerated rhetoric inflamed the rioters, Democrats repeatedly did the same thing this summer. Before and after Black Lives Matter protests devolved into destructive and deadly riots, Democratic officials repeatedly claimed America suffers from “systemic racism” and institutionalized “white supremacy.”
Big Tech did not remove House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s accounts when she called for “uprisings” against the Trump administration. Facebook and Twitter did not target Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez when she claimed that allegedly marginalized groups have “no choice but to riot.” These platforms did not act against Kamala Harris when she said the riots “should not” stop.
This week, Joe Biden condemned the Capitol rioters, saying, “What we witnessed yesterday was not dissent, it was not disorder, it was not protest. It was chaos. They weren’t protesters, don’t dare call them protesters. They were a riotous mob, insurrectionists, domestic terrorists. It’s that basic, it’s that simple.”
Yet he refused to speak in those terms when Black Lives Matter and antifa militants were throwing Molotov cocktails at federal buildings, setting up “autonomous zones,” and burning down cities. Instead, he condemned Trump for holding up a Bible at a church — without mentioning the fact that that very church had been set on fire the night before.
Despite this hypocrisy, Biden’s speech on Thursday proved instructive. Biden used the Capitol riots to condemn Trump’s entire presidency, accusing Trump of having “unleashed an all-out assault on our institutions of our democracy from the outset.” Biden twisted Trump’s actions into an attack on “democracy.” He claimed Trump’s originalist judges were a ploy to undermine impartial justice — when they were truly the exact opposite. Biden claimed Trump’s complaints about the Obama administration spying on his campaign were merely an “attack” on America’s “intelligence services.” Biden said Trump’s complaints about media bias constituted an attack on the “free press,” when the Obama administration actually attacked the free press.….
UPDATED post via PJ-MEDIA… who points out that these social media tech giants think they are the arbiter of speech as well as the type of information you consume. What is the free market solution? To start your own “companies,” or outlets of free speech. However, as PARLER is succeeding against Twitter and Facebook as a place to speak freely, Big Tech is going after those, too. More via PJ in a minute.
….National Review writer David French has criticized the bill for attempting to regulate free speech. He argues that this invites a dangerous level of government involvement in public discourse. Subjecting social media companies to government scrutiny may sound appealing with a Republican president in power and a predominantly Republican Senate, but this could backfire if Democrats take control: “Will a Kamala Harris administration decide that disproportionate conservative success violates political neutrality?”
Bad Examples Abound
Besides taking a rather Pollyannaish view on conservative success on social media—never bothering to mention the blatant partisan censorship of conservative voices like Steven Crowder, Prager University, or Live Action—this argument from French and those of other like-minded critics rests on two counterexamples where government cannot regulate speech without violating the First Amendment: a controlled forum like a college classroom, and a public utility like a telephone service.
However, these two examples do not have any bearing on what is meant by free speech. In the case of regulating a public utility, this does not involve actual speech. Speech, in the First Amendment sense, consists of arguments made to a public audience. A telephone service is a means of communication, not a platform for facilitating speech. Therefore, the federal government cannot demand a company like AT&T refuse service to pathological liars or criminals because they perpetuate harmful speech.
Furthermore, if AT&T executives did start to do this, on the grounds that they work for a private company and can do what they want, customers could rightly charge them with discrimination (violating the 14th Amendment). They must provide phone service to all who agree to pay them, not just those who meet their speech guidelines—again, because their service does not pertain to speech, but basic communication, a utility.
In the case of a college lecture hall, the speech in question is not actually free. The professor can make his arguments and say whatever the school permits him to say. He also sets the rules for what students can say. If Dr. Kevin Sorbo tells his students that God doesn’t exist, as he does in the Pure Flix movie “God’s Not Dead,” his students are not free to debate him unless he allows it—which he foolishly does, much to his demise. Nevertheless, they do have the right to free speech outside his class (unless they attend Harvard University) and can complain about their atheist professor all they like.
This is different from students who request government action when they feel their free speech rights are somehow violated because a professor has an opinion that they dislike. Hawley’s bill would not require the fictional Dr. Kevin Sorbo or the real Dr. Fang Zhou to change their views or speech policies to uphold political neutrality in their classroom. It only applies to large social media companies and is meant to prevent silencing any particular view, conservative or progressive.
It’s Naive to Think Big Tech Companies Will Die Out
Given that these social media platforms have billions of users altogether, and will simply buy up any worthy competitor if it stumbles on a new idea (which is the ongoing plotline of the television series “Silicon Valley”), it is misguided to assume that they will pass away like the social media companies of yesteryear (Myspace, Friendster, etc.). The Big Tech platforms are less like a few popular channels on television and more like the whole cable and basic television package. The truth is that they won’t need to change; conservatives who try to create content on their sites will.
Without any laws to check them, Big Tech companies are removing conservative voices and clearing the way for the Democratic narrative that Trump is terrible and more government can save America. Heard often enough, this narrative will convince Americans who have no way of knowing better to vote for Democrats. And it is not a stretch to assume that the first order of business for any Democratic president will be to impose speech laws that suppress conservative ideas or grant greater authority to the Big Tech thought police.
In this, French is right to ask what a Harris administration would do to free speech if given the chance, but wrong to conclude that she would exploit Hawley’s law to do it. She doesn’t need to. Speaking for most Democrats, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi opposes taking away social media’s legal protection (Section 230), considering it a “gift.” She recognizes that Democrat politicians will continue to benefit from the bias dominating all media and only stand to lose if conservatives compete on a level playing field.
It is nonetheless worth noting that even with numerous obstacles put in place, conservatives still dominate the internet because most Americans recognize that they have the better argument and discuss more relevant issues. By contrast, leftist publications depend on skewed narratives and bad arguments and tend to focus on tired topics like the Mueller report, Trump’s tax returns, and Joe Biden.
When given the chance, viewers will watch the watch Crowder over Vox’s Carlos Maza because Crowder is funnier, smarter, and doesn’t rely on people’s sympathy for his success. Of course, if Crowder stops producing his show because YouTube demonetizes his videos, viewers will not have a choice anymore.
In light of this fact, it is probably more accurate to frame the issue of regulating social media as more a matter of a free market than one of free speech, although one depends on the other. Many people on the left want to eliminate competition online and stop losing to conservative content creators. Allegations of hate and radicalization are merely a pretext to this.…
….After the social media platforms nixed Trump, people appeared to leave platforms in droves.
Nancy Pelosi, Ayanna Presley, and other Democrats have egged on rioters in the streets. Their social media accounts are still intact.
Conservative Americans have left the platforms in the understandable belief that if they could cut off the most powerful man in what used to be known as the free world, then they stood no chance.
To avoid the speech police, Americans have been leaving those platforms for Rumble and Parler, social media sites that promise to have few filters on speech. Parler does not allow illegal activity on its site under its terms of service.
But even as conservatives fled Facebook and Twitter for Parler, Big Tech decided to censor the site.
As I reported at PJ Media, Google Play cut off the Parler app from its app store and Apple followed suit in short order.
On Friday, a group called the “Amazon Employees for Climate Justice” wrote a screed to management demanding the tech behemoth boot the Parler app from its servers.
On Saturday, Amazon capitulated to the leftist rage mob and informed Parler it was getting rid of the social site from its servers.
Parler CEO John Matze announced that at midnight Sunday, Amazon would expunge the app content from its servers. Furthermore, he alleged that the tech giants conspired to orchestrate their moves to make it harder for Parler to stay afloat.
Sunday (tomorrow) at midnight Amazon will be shutting off all of our servers in an attempt to completely remove free speech off the internet. There is the possibility Parler will be unavailable on the internet for up to a week as we rebuild from scratch. We prepared for events like this by never relying on amazons [sic] proprietary infrastructure and building bare metal products.
We will try our best to move to a new provider right now as we have many competing for our business, however Amazon, Google and Apple purposefully did this as a coordinated effort knowing our options would be limited and knowing this would inflict the most damage right as President Trump was banned from the tech companies.
This was a coordinated attack by the tech giants to kill competition in the market place. We were too successful too fast. You can expect the war on competition and free speech to continue, but don’t count us out.
This is tyranny. This is groupthink.
To sum up:
Big Tech censored you and the president on Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Twitter
You left to go to other social media sites such as Parler, MeWe, Minds
Big Tech didn’t want you to leave for more freedom
Big Tech refused to let another social media platform, Parler, use their app stores
Big Tech then booted the social media site Parler from their servers
Double standards abound. No one on Twitter, Facebook, or Instagram was tossed off those platforms for protesting, rioting, looting, and vandalizing on behalf of Black Lives Matter and antifa. Lobbing Molotov cocktails wouldn’t get a group booted off a platform.
Ayatollahs and the Chinese death camp operators are held in higher regard than the president of the United States of America – and his supporters – because of Wednesday’s siege on the Capitol Building in Washington, D.C.
Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey Mocks Parler after Coordinated Big Tech to Take Down His Competition
…So with this coordination to take down the right and any other alternative to Twitter, you would think that Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey would be standing up for free speech, right? Just kidding.
Not only are they cool with booting off folks on the right from their site and removing the followers from virtually every right leaning account on Twitter, they’re also cool with their competition being stomped on. Indeed, if we were looking into antitrust questions in the coordination of all this, what Jack just posted would be Exhibit #1 in that action.
Here’s Jack celebrating that instead of Parler being the number 1 App on the App Store, his Signal App private messenger is instead. With a little help from his friends.
WEASEL ZIPPERS continues:
Amazon Kills Parler Server
You are not allowed an alternative either. They’re pulling them down tonight at 11:59 p.m. so Parler is looking for a new server.
Calling it a “coordinated attack,” Parler CEO John Matze informed the social media platform’s users Saturday that Amazon kicked Parler off their web hosting service, which will wipe them off the internet until they find a new host.
This devastating blow coming after Parler was removed from Google Play Store and Apple’s App Store.
The narrative employed to justify the Big Tech attack on Twitter’s biggest competitor is to link Parler, a free speech site being billed by the corrupt media as a “pro-Trump” site, to last week’s U.S. Capitol protest, claiming they allowed “calls for violence.”