Wednesday, January 20, 2021

WHO Changes COVID Testing Procedures on Inauguration Day

In an “inauguration” of its own while Joe Biden was being sworn into office, the World Health Organization initiated new rules regarding the PCR assays used for testing for COVID-19. Even though they’ve been widely used across the U.S.


The Fall of Rome and Modern Parallels

Mr. Reed is Assistant Professor of Economics at Northwood Institute, Midland, Michigan. This article is from a speech before the annual meeting of the Michigan Association of Timbermen, Gaylord, Michigan, April 21, 1979.


When a ‘Democratic’ Government Spends $250 Million to Manipulate You…

Is this authoritarian Vietnam or the United States? For-profit pharmaceutical giants assure us they have no ulterior motives, as they try to calm legitimate concerns people have about unproven vaccine technology.


Tuesday, January 19, 2021

Everything’s fine, there’s absolutely nothing to see here

In the darkest corners of our human instincts lies a psychological phenomenon that is the result of millions of years of evolutionary biology. It’s called “tonic immobility”. And it refers to a form of paralysis that occurs when we’re terrified and facing extreme mental or emotional trauma.


Ron Paul is Locked Out of Facebook as Big Brother Crackdown Against Free Speech Worsens


In the midst of the most extreme, heinous and Draconian crackdown against free speech by Big Tech yet, libertarian hero and national treasure Ron Paul has been “temporarily” banned from Facebook under a suspicious rationale.

Paul made the revelation in a Twitter post on Monday that he had been locked out of his own Facebook page, supposedly for violating Facebook’s nebulous and unevenly-enforced terms of service:

With no explanation other than "repeatedly going against our community standards," @Facebook has blocked me from managing my page. Never have we received notice of violating community standards in the past and nowhere is the offending post identified.

— Ron Paul (@RonPaul) January 11, 2021

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) reposted the news about his father being targeted by Mark Zuckerberg’s team of censors:

Facebook now considers advocating for liberty to be sedition. Where will it end?

— Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) January 11, 2021

Even though he is the victim of censorship, Paul was still able to get his “Texas Straight Talk” column out on the platform for the time being:

The only thing we posted to Facebook today was my weekly "Texas Straight Talk" column, which I have published every week since 1976.

— Ron Paul (@RonPaul) January 11, 2021

It is a young year, but this is not the first time that Paul has been censored by Big Tech. Paul was targeted for spreading COVID-19 information that was unapproved by Big Pharma, as Liberty Conservative News has reported:

Veteran, obstetrician, and former congressman Ron Paul was one of the latest victims of online censorship on December 22, 2020.

He was censored for “medical misinformation”, despite his well-established medical background.

On that day, Paul tweeted “Very disturbing news: YouTube has pulled an episode of the Ron Paul Liberty Report and issued a “warning” that any more violations will result in our not being able to put up more programs.”

… According to the renowned liberty conservative congressman, YouTube singled out the video without warning. The video was already a number of weeks old.

Paul continued tweeting, “If you care about independent media voices now is the time to fight against blatant censorship. Let YouTube know how you feel about their attack on the Ron Paul Liberty Report…”

He added, “The decision by YouTube to take the program down and issue a warning makes no sense. We are a news and analysis program. Why take down a program that is several weeks old out of the blue?”

In the episode that ended up getting censored, Paul criticized Dr. Anthony Fauci of the CDC. The former Congressman took Fauci to task for opposing the use of masks and then flip-flopping by supporting them.

The censorship of Paul has shown that Big Tech is not limiting their censorship campaign to President Donald Trump and his supporters after last week’s contentious Capitol rally that turned violent. They are going after anyone with a point of view that is incongruent with the ruling regime. This corporate censorship is as injurious to liberty as any government censorship that has taken place.

The post Ron Paul is Locked Out of Facebook as Big Brother Crackdown Against Free Speech Worsens appeared first on Liberty Conservative News.


America’s Demise Is Near At Hand


Guest Post by Paul Craig Roberts

For years I have been cataloging America’s decline into collapse, not merely economic collapse from economic concentration and the offshoring of jobs and investment, but also the collapse of the belief system that created some unity among a diverse population.  Today not only is the economy done for, but so is the belief system that sustained social and political stability.

America no longer exists.  A geographical entity exists of diverse peoples and interests, but not a country, much less a nation.  The United States itself has degenerated into an empire.  It is no longer simply a country with an empire.  The 50 states are themselves the Establishment’s empire, and it can only be held together by force.

Earlier in my life free speech was used by liberals to legalize pornography, homosexual marriage, and abortion, all of which were opposed by the majority of the population.  This did not stop liberals from imposing their agendas on the people.

Today free speech is impermissible, because it can be used to protest what half of the population sincerely believes was a stolen presidential election.  Even attorneys and legal firms that brought legitimate cases of electoral fraud for clients are being punished for doing the ordinary work of attorneys.  The same is happening to university professors and to average Americans who exercised their Constitutionally protected right of free speech and association and attended the Trump rally. See for example:

In America today, free speech can only be exercised in narrow and controlled channels.  It can be used to demonize President Trump and his supporters as “enemies of democracy.”  It can be used to demonize white people as “systemic racists” and “white supremacists,” and to demonize heterosexual white males as “misogynists.”  Its one other use is to demonize countries—Russia, China, and Iran—that stand in the way of Washington’s hegemony.  There are no other permissible uses of free speech today in the United States, an inappropriate name of the country as the country has been throughly disunited by Identity Politics and a presidential election widely perceived by voters to have been stolen.

I have provided for my readers a massive, but only partial, list of evidence of a stolen election.  See:

But a simple question suffices:  If the election was not stolen, why is it impermissible to  raise the question?  Explanations that are off limits to investigation and public discussion are unlikely to be true.  The reason they are off limits is because they cannot withstand examination. You don’t have to go back far in time to get a long list:  Assassinations of JFK, RFK, and MLK, Waco, Oklahoma City Bombing, 9/11, Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, Iranian nukes, Assayd’s use of chemical weapons, Russian invasion of Ukraine, Russiagate, 2020 electoral fraud, January 6 Trump Insurrection.  And, yes, I left out some, but the point stands without them.  A country in which explanations are controlled is a country in which people live in lies.

In America and Western civilization generally, the concept of objective truth has essentially been destroyed, especially in educational and communication institutions. Throughout the Western World the basis of truth has been shifted from evidence to emotion.  Emotion has become the important evidence.  Objective truth is dismissed as a construct that serves white males.

In America today everything is aligned against the white heterosexual population.  The Democrat left, universities, and media are aligned with race and gender victims of alleged white racism and transphobia.  Kristen Clarke has been appointed to the Justice (sic) Department to ensure that employment and promotion policies are aligned with race and gender victims.

Immigration policy is aligned against white Americans. Powerless as a majority, white Americans have no future as a minority.   Also:

Even if white Americans could escape their insouciance and realize that their country is being taken away from them, they are powerless to do anything about it. With the new domestic terrorism bill on the way, even a protest against dispossession is criminalized as sedition.

There are many interesting aspects of the situation that we could explore.  But let’s take only one.  The Biden regime seems to be filling up with neoconservative zionists who are agents of Washington and Israel’s hegemony.  The pursuit of this hegemony involves conflict with Russia, China, and Iran.

Washington will be entering these conflicts with a collapsed economy and a sharpely divided population.  Will the real backbone of the American armed forces—Trump deplorables—fight for an Establishment that hates its guts?  Will an economy drowning in debt and destroyed by corporate offshoring of investment and American middle class jobs and now by lockdowns that are destroying the remaining pieces of the middle class—small businesses—be able to sustain a conflict with nations more unified and free of external debt and unmanageable internal debt?  If so, it will be the first time in history.

How long will Trump deplorables remain docile when they realize that they are being exterminated by being cut off from equal rights, constitutional protection, employment and avenues of success?

As for the Establishment itself, when will its arrogance and confidence be shaken by the realization that it cannot control the anti-white, anti-American ideologues it has created and is itself facing the situation faced by Kerensky, the Brownshirts, and the Chinese Communist Party when Mao unleashed the cultural revolution?  Having empowered hatred and having let it out of the bottle, the Establishment itself will be destroyed by it.

Who will the Establishment appeal to when the revolution turns on them?  What answer will the Establishment have when they are asked the question Bolsheviks put to Kerensky:  “Who chose you?”


"People Are Nearing Rock Bottom": Fed's COVID Response Rewards Wealthy While Brutalizing Nation's Poorest

"People Are Nearing Rock Bottom": Fed's COVID Response Rewards Wealthy While Brutalizing Nation's Poorest

Newsflash: Federal Reserve policy is making the rich much richer.

Certainly that's not something we need to harp upon for most of our readers, who understand exactly how the Fed printing trillions of dollars over the course of months has further bifurcated the wealth gap in the United States. But, what is worthy to point out is that the mainstream media now appears to be getting wise to the concept - and all it took to realize what was going on was billionaires reaping another collective $1.3 trillion while the rest of the country suffered from agonizing depression. 

For example, over the weekend, Bloomberg published a piece called "The Rich Are Minting Money in the Pandemic Like Never Before". The sub-heading of the article simply said: "Country’s most well-off benefit from Federal Reserve policies". 

The report wonders how it is possible that some people are struggling for food, shelter and jobs while the rich cash in. "It's a difficult thing to fathom," the piece starts, but "there’s a whole class of people -- at least the top 20% or so of earners -- who’ve had to worry little about such matters."

Clearly, the report's authors don't read Zero Hedge - because it's not that difficult to fathom. In fact, it's been going on for decades.

The report goes on to note how mortgage refinancing, working from home and the stock market has helped along the "haves" while the "have nots" continue to struggle. These wealth gains "obscure" the plight of the middle and lower class, which has seen hundreds of thousands of businesses shut down and more than 10 million unemployed.

Peter Atwater, an adjunct professor at William & Mary, said: “There has probably not been a better time to be wealthy in America than today. So much of what policy makers did was to enable those that were wealthiest to rebound fastest from the pandemic.” 

Employment for the bottom quartile of workers, making less than $27,000 per year, remains 20% lower than January 2020 levels. 30 million adults lived in households where there wasn't enough to eat, according to the report - up 28% since prior to the pandemic. In Louisiana, 1 in 5 citizens faces food scarcity. 

Meanwhile, employment for the top quartile of workers earning over $60,000 per year has "already recovered to levels from a year ago". Many of Americans were also able to redirect money they would have used on entertainment and travel to savings and investments. Thanks to the Fed, these types of redirections have paid off well.

Hilariously, Bloomberg places blame on the bifurcation to "challenges" regarding money distribution: "By easing credit conditions via the Fed, lawmakers were able to quickly prop up large corporations and wealthier individuals. But distributing aid to smaller firms and low-income workers has turned out to be a lot more challenging." But, the truth is that it isn't more challenging - the Fed and the government choose to distribute newly printed money disproportionately. The government doesn't seem to understand the problem and the Fed simply doesn't seem to care. 

Jerome Powell said in December: “The Fed cannot grant money to particular beneficiaries. Elected officials have the power to tax and spend and to make decisions about where we, as a society, should direct our collective resources.”

Amanda Fischer, policy director at the Washington Center for Equitable Growth, commented: “If your wealth is captured by financial assets, you were back up and running in no time. It’s the lowest income folks who don’t even have to file taxes that have the highest barrier to climb.”

She continued, alluding to what sounds like eventual direct payments from the Fed: “Congress did a pretty good job of getting money to people, but we didn’t manage to fix decades of rusted plumbing. The fact that the Fed has infrastructure to do a bond-buying program but not do to anything else is a choice, not an inevitability.”

Heidi Shierholz of the Economic Policy Institute said: “Without more aid they will have to make more cuts, and cut services and that will disproportionately affect lower income families and communities. You cannot have a sustainable economy and political system where you have a small population who believe they are invincible and a growing population who feel defeated. It’s in capitalism’s best interest to close this gap.”

And while it does sound a bit like more socialism on top of socialism, she isn't terribly wrong about the idea of at possibly returning to some semblance of normalcy by attempting to close this gap and right some wrongs that have been perpetrated by the Fed over the last several decades, before turning things back over to the free market

But time is not on the side of the middle and lower class. Bradford Botes, a principal at bankruptcy law firm Bond & Botes in Birmingham, said: “People simply feel that they are nearing or at rock bottom. We are hearing a lot more hopelessness. [Stimulus] money was used by people just to get by. The additional stimulus has not been sufficient to make any type of difference for average Americans.”

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/19/2021 - 05:35


Monday, January 18, 2021

GOP leaders in D.C. don't represent 74 million Trump voters



The media lie. All the time. They lied about former President Barack Obama's economy; they tried to make us believe the worst economy since the Great Depression was a great economy. Then they lied about President Donald Trump's soaring economy. They tried to make us believe the best economy in 50 years, maybe the best economy ever for middle-class Americans, was a bad economy.

They lied about the Black Lives Matter riots. For months, we saw radical communists, Marxists and violent thugs riot, loot, burn, mug and murder while attacking police officers with bricks, pipes and Molotov cocktails. They burned entire downtown business districts to the ground, such as those in Minneapolis and Kenosha, Wisconsin. They burned police stations to the ground. They took over cities such as Portland and Seattle. They destroyed famous shopping districts such as Fifth Avenue in New York City and the Magnificent Mile in Chicago. They killed over 30 people. They caused over $2 billion in damage.

Yet liberal politicians and the liberal media ignored it all, or made believe it never happened, or made believe it was "peaceful," or encouraged it, or supported it. In many cases, they did all of the above.

Yet none of them was ever banned, censored, vilified or impeached. Heck, we rewarded Kamala Harris, who encouraged and celebrated that violence, with the vice presidency of the United States.

Then came the Washington, D.C., unrest involving President Trump's crowd. The liberal media blew that out of proportion into "the darkest day in American history," even though it was a small case of unrest compared with "the BLM summer of hate, rioting and murder," even though it may have involved Antifa instigators, even though Capitol Police were captured on camera letting protesters into the building, even though it involved a few hundred people out of a crowd of a million or more, even though no one burned down or looted the Capitol. The media made believe it was Pearl Harbor.

Here's the thing. Trump has had hundreds of rallies for six years now. Millions have attended, maybe 20 million-plus. And there's never been one window broken, one property damaged, one person shot, one police officer attacked. Yet after one incident in D.C., it's used as a trigger to ban and censor mention of the fact that the election was clearly stolen; to ban, censor and impeach President Trump; to ban and censor conservatives; and to label all 74 million Trump voters as "domestic terrorists."

There's the scam: Cover up hundreds of violent Antifa and Black Lives Matter incidents, and blow out of proportion this one incident of violence at a conservative event involving around 170 people out of 74 million, 170 who made a bad decision in the heat of the moment. That's assuming it wasn't Antifa causing the small amount of violence.

The key to this witch hunt was to use RINO ("Republican in name only"), Trump-hating leaders in D.C. as the cover to convince the world that even the GOP has abandoned and turned against Trump.

But it didn't work. Because those famous GOP leaders don't represent the people. They don't represent 74 million Trump voters. They only represent the dirty, corrupt D.C. swamp.

The results are in. The support for President Trump is so overwhelming even liberal media and pollsters can't hide the truth.

Trump-hating pollster Frank Luntz had to admit 91% of Trump voters would vote for him again and 78% of Trump voters believe the election was rigged and stolen.

A poll by the liberal Axios and Ipsos shows that 62% of Republicans support Trump's belief that the election was stolen, while 69% don't blame Trump for the Capitol violence.

But a much higher 91% of Trump voters support Trump's contesting the election results. Ninety-six percent believe Trump makes the GOP a stronger party. Ninety-two percent want Trump to run again in 2024.

And guess who loses badly in the Trump-McConnell battle? Sixty-four percent of Republicans approve of Trump's behavior over that of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

Trump's "America First" agenda is also still popular. Eighty-seven percent of Republicans and 63% of independent voters want companies to hire Americans before foreigners.

Democrats and the media keep trying to bury Trump and demoralize his supporters. I have to admit this plan was pretty remarkable. Their propaganda was intense. They came close. But in the end, they failed again.

Because they underestimated the hatred 74 million Trump voters have toward D.C. politicians – even Republican ones. We don't trust them. We don't like them. We don't care what they say. The more they hate Trump, the more we like him.

GOP leaders only represent the D.C. swamp. They don't represent 74 million Trump voters.


The post GOP leaders in D.C. don't represent 74 million Trump voters appeared first on WND.


The Unwelcome Return of the Real Purveyors of Violence


With the mainstream media still obsessing about the January 6th “violent coup attempt” at the US Capitol Building, the incoming Biden Administration looks to be chock full of actual purveyors of violent coups. Don’t look to the mainstream media to report on this, however. Some of the same politicians and bureaucrats denouncing the ridiculous farce at the Capitol as if it were the equivalent of 9/11 have been involved for decades in planning and executing real coups overseas. In their real coups, many thousands of civilians have died.

Take returning Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, for example. More than anyone else she is the face of the US-led violent coup against a democratically-elected government in Ukraine in 2014. Nuland not only passed out snacks to the coup leaders, she was caught on a phone call actually plotting the coup right down to who would take power once the smoke cleared.

Unlike the fake Capitol “coup,” this was a real overthrow. Unlike the buffalo horn-wearing joke who desecrated the “sacred” Senate chamber, the Ukraine coup had real armed insurrectionists with a real plan to overthrow the government. Eventually, with the help of incoming Assistant Secretary of State Nuland, they succeeded - after thousands of civilians were killed.

As we were unfortunately reminded during the last four years of the Trump Administration, the personnel is the policy. So while President Trump railed against the “stupid wars” and promised to bring the troops home, he hired people like John Bolton and Mike Pompeo to get the job done. They spent their time “clarifying” Trump’s call for ending wars to mean he wanted to actually continue the wars. It was a colossal failure.

So it’s hard to be optimistic about a Biden Administration with so many hyper-interventionist Obama retreads.

While the US Agency for International Development (USAID) likes to sell itself as the compassionate arm of the US foreign policy, in fact USAID is one of the main US “regime change” agencies. Biden has announced that a top “humanitarian interventionist” – Samantha Power – would head that Agency in his Administration.

Power, who served on President Obama’s National Security Council staff and as US Ambassador to the UN, argued passionately and successfully that a US attack on the Gaddafi government in Libya would result in a liberation of the people and the outbreak of democracy in the country. In reality, her justification was all based on lies and the US assault has left nothing but murder and mayhem. Gaddafi’s relatively peaceful, if authoritarian, government has been replaced by radical terrorists and even slave markets.

At the end of the day, the Bush Republicans – like Rep. Liz Cheney – will join hands with the Biden Democrats to reinstate “American leadership.” This of course means more US overt and covert wars overseas. The unholy alliance between Big Tech and the US government will happily assist the US State Department under Secretary of State Tony Blinken and Assistant Secretary of State Nuland with the technology to foment more “regime change” operations wherever the Biden Administration sees fit. Finish destroying Syria and the secular Assad? Sure! Go back into Iraq? Why not? Afghanistan? That’s the good war! And Russia and China must be punished as well.

These are grave moments for we non-interventionists. But also we have a unique opportunity, informed by history, to denounce the warmongers and push for a peaceful and non-interventionist foreign policy.


FBI vetting 25,000 National Guard troops to prevent insider attack



By Andrew Trunsky
Daily Caller News Foundation

Pentagon officials are worried about a possible insider attack following the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, prompting the FBI to vet every National Guard member deployed to Washington, D.C. to secure President-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration.

The nation’s capital has been almost completely locked down since the riot, when a mob clashed with Capitol Police and stormed the Capitol while lawmakers and Vice President Mike Pence were certifying Biden’s electoral victory. The attack has raised alarm among some officials that members of the National Guard could ultimately pose a threat against Biden and others when he gets sworn in publicly in front of the Capitol on Jan. 20, the Associated Press first reported.

“We’re continually going through the process, and taking second, third looks at every one of the individuals assigned to this operation,” Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy told the AP on Sunday. He added that he and other leaders had not seen any evidence that any National Guard members posed a threat, and that he and other military officials underwent a three-hour exercise in preparation for the inauguration on Wednesday.

“The question is, is that all of them? Are there others? We need to be conscious of it and we need to put all of the mechanisms in place to thoroughly vet these men and women who would support any operations like this,” McCarthy said.

Biden said last Monday that he was “not afraid” to take his oath of office outside, despite the perceived threat. McCarthy said that most Guard members will be armed, and that they were repeatedly going through drills and in constant contact with local authorities.

“This is a national priority. We have to be successful as an institution,” he added. “We want to send a message to everyone in the United States and for the rest of the world that we can do this safely and peacefully.”

This story originally was published by the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact


The post FBI vetting 25,000 National Guard troops to prevent insider attack appeared first on WND.


No ‘Virus’ Pandemic Exists: The Covid Fraud Is Nothing More Than a Cover for Many Other Evils



“Still, instead of trusting what their own minds tell them, men have as a rule a weakness for trusting others who pretend to supernatural sources of knowledge.”

~ Arthur Schopenhauer (1851). “Religion, a Dialogue”  

The state is now God, and religion has been largely relegated to worship of the state. This has been the objective all along.

This country has turned totalitarian almost overnight, and every claimed deadly threat falsely propagated by the state that has been intellectually challenged, has been refuted and then substantiated by strong evidence or fact. Invariably, the truth is ignored and said to be “conspiracy theory.” This is no valid argument of course, but when the powerful ‘elites,’ their ‘owned’ politicians, and the mainstream media only have to convince the foolish masses, it is in most cases enough to just talk down and marginalize the truth tellers with pejorative language. As a matter of record, many in the societal herd have also taken this CIA created derogatory term to heart, and it is normally the first thing out of the mouths of those common citizens when any legitimate explanation of corruption is levied. They do this because they have been trained to do so, and do not have the ability to discuss intellectually matters of vital importance. But with this useful cooperation of the masses, those few of us willing to challenge this tyranny are constantly barraged and censored by not only the state controllers, but also by the public at large. This ganging up by rulers and slaves alike against truth tellers tends to diminish honest criticism in favor of the preferred state narrative, and when that happens, tyranny is the result.

It is as if the state rulers had set up a giant trap to ensnare the herd. Then panic was initiated by instilling great fear of a mystery ‘virus monster, and all began to run toward government to find safety. The trap was baited with state goodies, masks, cash, PCR tests, vaccines, and propaganda, and it was quickly tripped, and the American public was caught and locked inside. This simple trick was all that was necessary in order to secure the submission of the minds and bodies of such a weak and pathetic population. Gullible does not even begin to explain the people’s reaction to this ‘Covid-19’ scam, and the ease in which most all were captured by the lies and deceit, while their freedoms were taken from them without resistance.

But ‘Covid-19’ does not exist; it has never been isolated, separated, or identified as a novel virus. There has never been any attempt to satisfy Koch’s Postulates in order to claim that a new virus is present. In other words, it has never been proven to be a virus at all, and the CDC itself has verified this fact. The PCR testing for this mystery ‘killer’ is not suitable or capable of identifying or diagnosing that any virus is present, much less this fake one, and is not able to determine or not if anyone is sick or even going to be sick, especially since no so-called ‘Covid-19’ virus has ever been found. The inventor of the PCR was Kary Mullis, and he won the Nobel Prize in chemistry for that work. His own analysis verifies these assertions. In addition, there is not any real evidence that this claimed virus is contagious at all, much less deadly contagious. If it were, it would be much more widespread, and all those in contact with those testing positive would certainly get sick, but this has never been the case.

The government and ‘health’ organization’s list of symptoms has changed dramatically over time to include over 170 different symptoms. And this ridiculous list, which was compiled last October, will certainly grow even more. Every single person could easily have one or more of these symptoms at any given moment, which indicates a convoluted mess of lies. What began with flu-like symptoms, and respiratory compromise has spread to pages upon pages of symptoms, all meant to cause everyone to believe that they may have ‘Covid.’ Could this have been a way to coax many more people to test with the useless PCR in order to falsely and purposely inflate the number of cases? This seems logical to say the very least.

People are getting sick, and are expressing symptoms that are much more akin to radiation poisoning than to any virus. They are also succumbing to the horrible effects of isolation and stress, to the fact that our immune systems due to government policies and mandates are being compromised beyond repair, and to many other outside factors. But most of these are not symptoms that indicate a virus is present, so is this by design? In my opinion, this was planned and gamed out long ago, and much evidence supports this claim. It is being used strictly as the impetus for the “Great Reset” of humanity. While sicknesses, some horrible and unique in nature, are occurring, the total death numbers are still the same or less than the past few years. This fact alone contradicts the entire ‘Covid’ narrative, and certainly exposes that no pandemic is present, and never has been present.

This is psychological and physical warfare against the people, but it is more than that. Certain sectors of our population are being targeted, and this includes the old and infirmed, all those with chronic health problems, including mental disabilities, regardless of age, and those with highly compromised immune systems. This should be obvious to all due to the fact that the state has chosen this highly compromised portion of society to be the first to be injected with an unproven, untested, mRNA, gene altering, and toxic and poisonous vaccine. The agendas sought are evil in intent and evil in delivery. The numbers of deaths falsely claimed as ‘Covid’ could certainly increase with this agenda of vaccinating the weakest among us. Will these additional deaths have been considered and planned in advance? Does this plot include the possibility of eliminating that part of society that is most dependent on government, and that is the biggest drain on this government created debt-ridden economy? Is population control alive and well in America and the world? I do not think this arguable, and in fact, many members of our older populations have already been the victims of state murder.

The agendas sought by those in power are sinister in nature. This has to be because the primary agenda of the state is always based on gaining money, power, and control over humanity. With that known objective in mind, each and every step along the way will be incrementally pursued and always detrimental to the population at large. This will continue until the people are so weak that they will accept even the most blatant of lies, and become willing to acquiesce to the most ludicrous, harmful, and dehumanizing orders, laws, and mandates demanded by the state tyrants. Once this stage is reached, the final push can be attempted and likely achieved. We are heading into the final stage in this country today, and 2021 will be the year that Americans decide whether to be free or to be slaves to this corrupt and heinous system of rule.

The evil of the world is made possible by nothing but the sanction you give it.

Ayn Rand (2005). “Atlas Shrugged”, p.1006, Penguin

The post No ‘Virus’ Pandemic Exists: The Covid Fraud Is Nothing More Than a Cover for Many Other Evils appeared first on LewRockwell.


Sunday, January 17, 2021

'Q-Anon' Bears Striking Resemblance to Bolshevik Psy-Op From 1920s Known As 'Operation Trust'



"Operation Trust" was a Bolshevik counterintelligence operation run from 1921 to 1926 aimed at neutralizing opposition by creating the false impression that a powerful group of military leaders had organized to stop the communists' takeover.



“The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it’s profitable to continue the illusion.


Arkansas Online


Hunter Biden, Burisma, and Corruption: The Impact on U.S. Government Policy and Related Concerns


Comments: clau


After a protracted investigation, the US Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, in conjunction with the US Senate Finance Committee, has released an investigative report on “numerous and complex financial transactions” involving Hunter Biden, son of former Vice President Joe Biden, while he was a board member of the Ukrainian energy company Burisma. Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, was involved in “numerous and complex financial transactions” during his time as a board member of the Ukrainian energy company Burisma. Hunter Biden’s role at Burisma and the conflicts of interest it created created a dilemma and embarrassment for other US government officials in Ukraine as they attempted to guide and support Ukraine’s anti-corruption efforts. This fact has even interfered with the effective implementation of U.S. policy toward Ukraine.

The facts and figures that emerge from the key findings are striking in that Joe Biden used his position as Vice President of the United States to tacitly allow his drug-addicted son, Hunter Biden, to act as his white glove, enrich himself, collude with foreign agents, interfere with the normal work of US officials and influence US foreign policy. Instead of exercising its normal functions, the relevant US agency (FBI) has become the umbrella for the Biden family’s criminal corruption (the US Secret Service), how absurd. The actions of the Biden crime family are reminiscent of the behaviour and logic of the CCP Standing Committee families, and the Biden crime family is a good student of the CCP and has learned the essence of the CCP. This report only shows the tip of the iceberg of the crimes committed by the Biden family during the Obama administration in the U.S. As the battle between good and evil enters deep waters, and as the comical results of the U.S. elections are about to be revealed, along with the awakening of people around the world, all the truths will come out. It has all begun!

Hunter Biden, Burisma, and Corruption: The Impact on U.S. Government Policy and Related Concerns


In late 2013 and into 2014, mass protests erupted in Kyiv, Ukraine, demanding integration into western economies and an end to systemic corruption that had plagued the country. At least 82 people were killed during the protests, which culminated on Feb. 21 when Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych abdicated by fleeing the country. Less than two months later, over the span of only 28 days, significant events involving the Bidens unfolded.

On April 16, 2014, Vice President Biden met with his son’s business partner, Devon Archer, at the White House. Five days later, Vice President Biden visited Ukraine, and he soon after was described in the press as the “public face of the administration’s handling of Ukraine.” The day after his visit, on April 22, Archer joined the board of Burisma. Six days later, on April 28, British officials seized $23 million from the London bank accounts of Burisma’s owner, Mykola Zlochevsky. Fourteen days later, on May 12, Hunter Biden joined the board of Burisma, and over the course of the next several years, Hunter Biden and Devon Archer were paid millions of dollars from a corrupt Ukrainian oligarch for their participation on the board.

The 2014 protests in Kyiv came to be known as the Revolution of Dignity — a revolution against corruption in Ukraine. Following that revolution, Ukrainian political figures were desperate for U.S. support. Zlochevsky would have made sure relevant Ukrainian officials were well aware of Hunter’s appointment to Burisma’s board as leverage. Hunter Biden’s position on the board created an immediate potential conflict of interest that would prove to be problematic for both U.S. and Ukrainian officials and would affect the implementation of Ukraine policy.

The Chairmen’s investigation into potential conflicts of interest began in August 2019, with Chairman Grassley’s letter to the Department of Treasury regarding potential conflicts of interest with respect to Obama administration policy relating to the Henniges transaction.*1 During the Obama administration, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) approved a transaction that gave control over Henniges, an American maker of anti- vibration technologies with military applications, to a Chinese government-owned aviation company and a China-based investment firm with established ties to the Chinese government. One of the companies involved in the Henniges transaction was a billion-dollar private investment fund called Bohai Harvest RST (BHR). BHR was formed in November 2013 by a merger between the Chinese-government-linked firm Bohai Capital and a company named Rosemont Seneca Partners. Rosemont Seneca was formed in 2009 by Hunter Biden, the son of then-Vice President Joe Biden, by Chris Heinz, the stepson of former Secretary of State John Kerry, and others.*2

*1 Press Release, Chairman Charles Grassley, S. Comm. on Fin., Grassley Raises Concerns Over Obama Admin Approval of U.S. Tech Company Joint Sale to Chinese Government and Investment Firm Linked to Biden, Kerry Families (Aug. 15, 2019), joint-sale-to-chinese-government-and-investment-firm-linked-to-biden-kerry-families.

*2 Peter Schweizer, Inside the Shady Private Equity Firm Run by Kerry and Biden’s Kids, NEW YORK POST (Mar. 15, 2018),; Peter Schweizer, The Troubling Reason Why Biden is so Soft on China, NEW YORK POST (May 11, 2019), reason-why-biden-is-so-soft-on-china/; Tom Llamas et al., Biden Sidesteps Questions About His Son’s Foreign Business Dealings but Promises Ethics Pledge, ABC NEWS (June 20, 2019), sons-foreign-business-dealings-promises/story?id=63820806 (Stating that Hunter Biden was a managing partner at Rosemont Seneca Partners.).

Access to relevant documents and testimony has been persistently hampered by criminal investigations, impeachment proceedings, COVID-19, and several instances of obstructive behavior. Accordingly, this investigation has taken longer than it should have. The Chairmen’s efforts have always been driven by our belief that the public has the right to know about wrongdoing and conflicts of interest occurring within government, and especially those conflicts brought about by the actions of governmental officials. This is a good-government oversight investigation that relies on documents and testimony from U.S. agencies and officials, not a Russian disinformation campaign, as our Democratic colleagues have falsely stated.

What the Chairmen discovered during the course of this investigation is that the Obama administration knew that Hunter Biden’s position on Burisma’s board was problematic and did interfere in the efficient execution of policy with respect to Ukraine. Moreover, this investigation has illustrated the extent to which officials within the Obama administration ignored the glaring warning signs when the vice president’s son joined the board of a company owned by a corrupt Ukrainian oligarch. And, as will be discussed in later sections, Hunter Biden was not the only Biden who cashed in on Joe Biden’s vice presidency.

This report not only details examples of extensive and complex financial transactions involving the Bidens, it also describes the quandary other U.S. governmental officials faced as they attempted to guide and support Ukraine’s anticorruption efforts. The Committees will continue to evaluate the information and evidence as it becomes available.

Key Findings

▶ In early 2015 the former Acting Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv, Ukraine, George Kent, raised concerns to officials in Vice President Joe Biden’s office about the perception of a conflict of interest with respect to Hunter Biden’s role on Burisma’s board. Kent’s concerns went unaddressed, and in September 2016, he emphasized in an email to his colleagues, “Furthermore, the presence of Hunter Biden on the Burisma board was very awkward for all U.S. officials pushing an anticorruption agenda in Ukraine.”

▶ In October 2015, senior State Department official Amos Hochstein raised concerns with Vice President Biden, as well as with Hunter Biden, that Hunter Biden’s position on Burisma’s board enabled Russian disinformation efforts and risked undermining U.S. policy in Ukraine.

▶ Although Kent believed that Hunter Biden’s role on Burisma’s board was awkward for all U.S. officials pushing an anti-corruption agenda in Ukraine, the Committees are only aware of two individuals — Kent and former U.S. Special Envoy and Coordinator for International Energy Affairs Amos Hochstein — who raised concerns to Vice President Joe Biden (Hochstein) or his staff (Kent).

▶ The awkwardness for Obama administration officials continued well past his presidency. Former Secretary of State John Kerry had knowledge of Hunter Biden’s role on Burisma’s board, but when asked about it at a town hall event in Nashua, N.H. on Dec. 8, 2019, Kerry falsely said, “I had no knowledge about any of that. None. No.” Evidence to the contrary is detailed in Section V.

▶ Former Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland testified that confronting oligarchs would send an anticorruption message in Ukraine. Kent told the Committees that Zlochevsky was an “odious oligarch.” However, in December 2015, instead of following U.S. objectives of confronting oligarchs, Vice President Biden’s staff advised him to avoid commenting on Zlochevsky and recommended he say, “I’m not going to get into naming names or accusing individuals.”

▶ Hunter Biden was serving on Burisma’s board (supposedly consulting on corporate governance and transparency) when Zlochevsky allegedly paid a $7 million bribe to officials serving under Ukraine’s prosecutor general, Vitaly Yarema, to “shut the case against Zlochevsky.” Kent testified that this bribe occurred in December 2014 (seven months after Hunter joined Burisma’s board), and, after learning about it, he and the Resident Legal Advisor reported this allegation to the FBI.

▶ Hunter Biden was a U.S. Secret Service protectee from Jan. 29, 2009 to July 8, 2014. A day before his last trip as a protectee, Time published an article describing Burisma’s ramped up lobbying efforts to U.S. officials and Hunter’s involvement in Burisma’s board. Before ending his protective detail, Hunter Biden received Secret Service protection on trips to multiple foreign locations, including Moscow, Beijing, Doha, Paris, Seoul, Manila, Tokyo, Mexico City, Milan, Florence, Shanghai, Geneva, London, Dublin, Munich, Berlin, Bogota, Abu Dhabi, Nairobi, Hong Kong, Taipei, Buenos Aires, Copenhagen, Johannesburg, Brussels, Madrid, Mumbai and Lake Como.

▶ Andrii Telizhenko, the Democrats’ personification of Russian disinformation, met with Obama administration officials, including Elisabeth Zentos, a member of Obama’s National Security Council, at least 10 times. A Democrat lobbying firm, Blue Star Strategies, contracted with Telizhenko from 2016 to 2017 and continued to request his assistance as recent as the summer of 2019. A recent news article detailed other extensive contacts between Telizhenko and Obama administration officials.

▶ In addition to the over $4 million paid by Burisma for Hunter Biden’s and Archer’s board memberships, Hunter Biden, his family, and Archer received millions of dollars from foreign nationals with questionable backgrounds.

▶ Archer received $142,300 from Kenges Rakishev of Kazakhstan, purportedly for a car, the same day Vice President Joe Biden appeared with Ukrainian Prime Minister Arsemy Yasenyuk and addressed Ukrainian legislators in Kyiv regarding Russia’s actions in Crimea.

▶ Hunter Biden received a $3.5 million wire transfer from Elena Baturina, the wife of the former mayor of Moscow.

▶ Hunter Biden opened a bank account with Gongwen Dong to fund a $100,000 global spending spree with James Biden and Sara Biden.

▶ Hunter Biden had business associations with Ye Jianming, Gongwen Dong, and other Chinese nationals linked to the Communist government and the People’s Liberation Army. Those associations resulted in millions of dollars in cash flow.

▶ Hunter Biden paid nonresident women who were nationals of Russia or other Eastern European countries and who appear to be linked to an “Eastern European prostitution or human trafficking ring.”

πŸ”— Click here to read the full article (PDF)

πŸ”–Click here to read more articles in G-News

πŸ“ΊClick to watch the exciting video on G-TV

Edited by:【Himalaya London Club UK】


When conspiracy theories come true: Sunday Times under fire for branding Covid vax passports as ‘freedom certificates’



The Sunday Times is facing a social media backlash for pushing Covid-19 vaccination passports as “freedom certificates” with many noting that the idea was considered a crazy conspiracy theory only a few months ago.


Peer-Reviewed Study “Did Not Find Evidence” Lockdowns Were Effective In Stopping COVID Spread


Via ZeroHedge

Liberals may be able to argue with Fox News or even Republican politicians. But what happens when a peer reviewed study comes out of one of their coveted and prestigious universities in California potentially showing that their collective reaction to Covid may have been completely worthless and, as a result, may have done exceptionally more harm than good?

Along those lines, it seems like a good idea to point out that a new peer reviewed study out of Stanford is questioning the effectiveness of lockdowns and stay-at-home orders (which it calls NPIs, or non-pharmaceutical interventions) to combat Covid-19. The study’s lead author is an associate professor in the Department of Medicine at Stanford.

“The study did not find evidence to support that NPIs were effective in preventing the spread,” according to Outkick, who published the report.

The study, co-authored by Dr. Eran Bendavid, Professor John P.A. Ioannidis, Christopher Oh, and Jay Bhattacharya, studied the effects of NPIs in 10 different countries, including England, France, Germany and Italy.

And, when all was said and done, it concluded that: “In summary, we fail to find strong evidence supporting a role for more restrictive NPIs in the control of COVID in early 2020.”

In fact, the study found  “no clear, significant beneficial effect of more restrictive NPIs on case growth in any country.”

From the study:


“In the framework of this analysis, there is no evidence that more restrictive non-pharmaceutical interventions (“lockdowns”) contributed substantially to bending the curve of new cases in England, France, Germany, Iran, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, or the United States in early 2020. By comparing the effectiveness of NPIs on case growth rates in countries that implemented more restrictive measures with those that implemented less restrictive measures, the evidence points away from indicating that more restrictive NPIs provided additional meaningful benefit above and beyond less restrictive NPIs. While modest decreases in daily growth (under 30%) cannot be excluded in a few countries, the possibility of large decreases in daily growth due to more restrictive NPIs is incompatible with the accumulated data.”

The study even looked into the potential of stay-at-home orders facilitating spread of the virus:

“The direction of the effect size in most scenarios point towards an increase in the case growth rate, though these estimates are only distinguishable from zero in Spain (consistent with non-beneficial effect of lockdowns). Only in Iran do the estimates consistently point in the direction of additional reduction in the growth rate, yet those effects are statistically indistinguishable from zero. While it is hard to draw firm conclusions from these estimates, they are consistent with a recent analysis that identified increase transmission and cases in Hunan, China during the period of stay-at-home orders from increased intra-household density and transmission. In other words, it is possible that stay-at-home orders may facilitate transmission if they increase person-to-person contact where transmission is efficient such as closed spaces.”

It continues: “We do not question the role of all public health interventions, or of coordinated communications about the epidemic, but we fail to find an additional benefit of stay-at-home orders and business closures. The data cannot fully exclude the possibility of some benefits. However, even if they exist, these benefits may not match the numerous harms of these aggressive measures. More targeted public health interventions that more effectively reduce transmissions may be important for future epidemic control without the harms of highly restrictive measures.”

You can read the full study here.


Silicon Valley and WEF-Backed Foundation Announce Global Initiative for COVID-19 Vaccine Records, by Whitney Webb

This will scare the crap out of you, a Whitney Webb trademark. From Webb at Silicon Valley’s most influential companies, alongside healthcare companies, US intelligence contractors and the Commons Project Foundation, recently launched the Vaccination Credential Initiative. The initiative’s … Continue reading


Saturday, January 16, 2021

Biden to deploy FEMA, National Guard to set up Covid vaccine clinics across the United States




State Department Has Evidence Supporting COVID Lab Escape Theory, Questions Credibility Of 'Batwoman' Shi Zhengli

State Department Has Evidence Supporting COVID Lab Escape Theory, Questions Credibility Of 'Batwoman' Shi Zhengli

Nearly a year to the day that ZeroHedge raised suspicions over the origins of the COVID-19 outbreak - and were called 'conspiracy theorists' for it - the US State Department just revealed that they have new information suggesting it could have emerged from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).

In a Friday statement, the state department announced that while they haven't determined whether the COVID-19 pandemic "began through contact with infected animals or was the result of an accident at a laboratory in Wuhan, China," the US government "has reason to believe that several researchers inside the WIV became sick in autumn 2019, before the first identified case of the outbreak, with symptoms consistent with both COVID-19 and common seasonal illnesses."

State Department: "The U.S. government does not know exactly where, when, or how the COVID-19 virus...was transmitted initially to humans. We haven't determined whether the outbreak began thru contact w/ infected animals or was the result of an accident at a laboratory in Wuhan."

— Jerry Dunleavy (@JerryDunleavy) January 16, 2021

"This raises questions about the credibility of WIV senior researcher Shi Zhengli's public claim that there was "zero infection" among the WIV's staff and students of SARS-CoV-2 or SARS-related viruses."

Zhengli, known as "Batwoman," was notably scrutinized in 2015 over her work creating chimeric bat coronaviruses through 'gain-of-function' research to more easily infect humans.

According to the State Department, "starting in at least 2016 - and with no indication of a stop prior to the COVID-19 outbreak -- WIV researchers conducted experiments involving RaTG13, the bat coronavirus identified by the WIV in January 2020 as its closest sample to SARS-CoV-2 (96.2% similar).

Further, "The WIV has published a record of conducting "gain-of-function" research to engineer chimeric viruses. But the WIV has not been transparent or consistent about its record of studying viruses most similar to the COVID-19 virus, including "RaTG13," which it sampled from a cave in Yunnan Province in 2013 after several miners died of SARS-like illness."

Secret military activity

The State Department further noted that "Secrecy and non-disclosure are standard practice for Beijing," adding that "For many years the United States has publicly raised concerns about China's past biological weapons work, which Beijing has neither documented nor demonstrably eliminated, despite its clear obligations under the Biological Weapons Convention."

According to the release, "Despite the WIV presenting itself as a civilian institution, the United States has determined that the WIV has collaborated on publications and secret projects with China's military. The WIV has engaged in classified research, including laboratory animal experiments, on behalf of the Chinese military since at least 2017."

Pompeo on the offensive

On Saturday, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo slammed the CCP for 'covering up' the Wuhan Virus, saying in a tweet that the "CCP disappeared the doctors who knew," and "still refuses to let the world in to see what it wrought."

"CCP lied about where the virus came from," Pompeo added.

CCP closed travel inside China and allowed the world to suffer. America invents vaccines for the world. Every human being can see this contrast.

— Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) January 16, 2021

China has repeatedly rejected charges that the virus might have emerged from a laboratory. The U.S. didn’t say how it obtained the new information about illnesses at the lab.

The comments, also noted in a State Department fact sheet, come as China faces criticism for initially preventing some members of a WHO mission from entering China as part of an effort to trace the origin of COVID-19, saying they hadn’t passed health screenings. While the experts were eventually granted clearance, China had already been criticized by the WHO for delaying the mission’s plans to visit the country.

China has been under scrutiny since the outbreak exploded in and around Wuhan, but the Trump administration also sought to pin more blame on authorities in Beijing after the pandemic took off in the U.S. and deaths soared. -Japan Times

The State Department release comes amid China barring entry to two members of a WHO team that was finally allowed to investigate the origins of the pandemic because they tested positive for COVID-19 antibodies. China has demanded that the remaining 13 members undergo two weeks of quarantine in Wuhan.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/16/2021 - 16:20


Big Tech's purge of conservatives changes speech debate


[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics.]

By Alfredo Ortiz
Real Clear Politics

Big Tech’s coordinated silencing of conservative voices, including President Trump’s, signals a crossing of the Rubicon in the debate over government involvement to protect free speech.

Even conservatives like me, who have long argued that small-business competition is the best way to moderate the tech oligarchs’ power, recognize that government may now have an interest in making some large companies, such as basic web-hosting platforms, utilities akin to AT&T.

Since last week’s U.S. Capitol riots, Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram have indefinitely banned the president, eliminating his primary means of communication with the American public. They have also canceled social media accounts that speak of election irregularities and other conservative topics. Countless conservative commentators have inexplicably lost tens of thousands of followers.

Ostensibly, this purge is intended to prevent further violence and rioting. In reality, it is a power grab. No matter their political ideology, Americans must reject this violation of free speech – and recognize that this muzzle may one day be used on them. As the ACLU states, “It should concern everyone when companies like Facebook and Twitter wield the unchecked power to remove people from platforms that have become indispensable for the speech of billions.”

Since social media first began censoring political viewpoints, starting prominently with Alex Jones in 2018, conservatives have generally responded by noting that these are private companies free to deny services to whomever they please. Even though these social giants are 21st-century versions of the town square, they are private businesses first and foremost. Don’t like their de-platforming decisions? Start a competitor that doesn’t censor.

Often left unsaid in this argument is that these companies enjoy special regulatory treatment, known as Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. This protection shields them from liability as mere communications platforms, like a phone carrier, rather than as traditional publishers legally responsible for what they publish.

Yet eliminating this regulatory advantage by repealing Section 230 would likely backfire. If tech companies are suddenly liable for their content, then censorship would only increase, resulting in even less speech. Regulating social media companies as traditional publishers would also entrench their oligopoly status because new content-moderation burdens would be so costly that it would prevent new competitors from entering the market.

The argument for more small-business competition in this space is undercut, however, when Big Tech can simply team up to de-platform and even de-host their competitors, banishing them from the Internet altogether. Last weekend, Google, Apple, and Amazon worked in tandem to destroy Twitter competitor Parler. Google and Apple banned it from their app stores. Then Amazon, one of the few web-hosting clients that can accommodate a data-rich site like Parler, pulled the plug by terminating its hosting completely.

The tech companies justified their unprecedented decision by claiming that Parler is a threat to public safety. Yet Parler doesn’t allow incitement to violence and has roughly the same amount of objectionable content as Twitter and Facebook. Could some of its content conceivably encourage riots? Of course. But by that standard, Twitter and Facebook accounts that promote Black Lives Matter content, which inadvertently fueled riots last summer, should also be purged.

Tech’s black-holing of Parler is likely more about destroying small-business competition and cementing its own power. Before being shut down, Parler was the number one downloaded app. With Trump likely to encourage his 88 million followers to migrate to the site after his Twitter ban, it was primed for exponential growth. Big Tech killed it in its cradle. Parler CEO John Matze said that the purge was a “coordinated attack by the tech giants to kill competition in the marketplace.”

Many conservatives like me are hesitant to claim that government is the solution to this problem. But when small businesses can’t even get hosting, what are they supposed to do next? Create their own Internet?

If these companies can’t even find a foothold on the web, then regulating web-hosting in ways akin to utilities would become a proper use of government. Just as utilities such as AT&T can’t exclude services to users based on political beliefs, neither could utility web-hosting companies.

Let’s hope that it doesn’t come to this, and that a bipartisan coalition of Americans can rise up to demand tech companies put broad free speech goals above narrow partisan interests. Yet we may already have crossed over the brink.

Alfredo Ortiz is the president and CEO of the Job Creators Network.

[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics.]


The post Big Tech's purge of conservatives changes speech debate appeared first on WND.


Signs and Wonders



In case you don’t know what condition our condition is in, the name for it is a crisis of legitimacy. Four years of seditious harassment by a “Resistance” within-and-without the US Government culminates in the janky election of a mentally incapable grifter… run by whom? Does anyone seek to know who, exactly, is pulling Joe Biden’s strings? My guess would be…duh… Barack Obama and his posse. When will he be outed? Maybe today… or next week at the latest. Heads will explode to see liberalism’s bowling trophy fall off the national mantelpiece. If you think Nancy Pelosi is running around in a hebephrenic fugue state now, just wait.

A crisis of legitimacy means that citizens have lost faith in their institutions, that is, in the armature of agreements and procedures for running this society. Do you have any idea how much damage RussiaGate did to the country? The three-year-long mind-fuck perpetrated by the highest officials of the FBI and the CIA ruined whatever was left of their reputations. Not only are citizens not safe from the powers of life-and-death vested in these agencies, but they know that officials who wield that power recklessly won’t be held responsible when acting outside the law. Are we any better now than the Russians under Leonid Brezhnev?

UkraineGate and the first Trump impeachment it spawned was a CIA operation that used CIA agent Eric Ciaramella and Intel Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson (a former DOJ RussiaGate player) to cover up the influence-peddling crimes of Joe Biden’s family behind a smokescreen of perfidy fanned over the nation by the notorious RussiaGate liar, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA). The State Department assisted in that op, and now the whole country knows that they are also ethically unreliable.

In both of these gigantic flimflams, the president could not get any satisfactory scrutiny of the injuries attempted against him, because the ops were run by the very agencies needed to provide that scrutiny over unlawful official behavior. Did the DOJ and its stepchild, the FBI, show any interest in the recent voting irregularities, or is it just convenient to let it all slide so they can answer to a new president, with a clear and urgent interest in burying the matter?

Is it any wonder that a huge chunk of the population doesn’t believe the election was on-the-level? Federal law enforcement has not revealed the identities of exactly who incited the invasion of the Capitol building — and do you believe who The New York Times and CNN claim it was: white supremacist Nazis? Has it not occurred to the “winner” and his handlers that such a public mood of distrust will thunder through our national affairs going forward?

It’s late in the game but something appears to still be in play, and the Resistance is keenly aware of it: a trove of declassified documents laying out their crimes against their own countrymen. Nothing has stuck to the Resistance because they controlled the levers of adjudication. What if, under the extraordinary conditions of the moment, those levers are transferred to one arm of the government that has not disgraced itself: the military? I wrote in this blog more than once in recent years that political disorder could lead to this. Has that moment come?

Thousands of troops are billeted in and around Washington DC now. Why is that? The figment of more white supremacists coming to reenact last week’s incident at the Capitol? I don’t think so. A BLM / Antifa riot, like the ones staged in cities (including Washington DC) all through the summer and fall? (Weren’t they mostly peaceful?) Or is something else up, something that will mark an epochal shift in the fortunes of the USA?

Did you catch Joe Biden on TV last night? Did his appearance fill you with the sweet, warm unction of reassurance? Or did you get the impression that I got: of a near-mummy in a state of panicky confusion, sent from his hidey-hole out to a podium to give an impersonation of someone in authority? I didn’t believe the performance for a minute. The poor schlemiel is headed straight into history’s discontinued merchandise bin. He will probably wonder what awful vanity propelled him down the memory hole as he descends into the darkness… but his memory preceded him down the memory hole and he will have forgotten how the whole thing started. His exit will be a merciful one compared to the people who trussed him up and shoved him onstage to flesh out their lame narrative.

Reprinted with permission from

The post Signs and Wonders appeared first on LewRockwell.


Our Disputed Election



Although hardly suggested by our mainstream media, the officially-reported results demonstrated that our 2020 presidential election was extraordinarily close.

All the regular pre-election polls had shown the Democratic candidate with a comfortable lead, but just as had been the case four years earlier, the actual votes tabulated revealed an entirely contrary outcome. According to the official vote-count, the Biden/Harris ticket ended up millions of votes ahead, having racked up huge leads in overwhelmingly Democratic states such as my own California, and also won by a very comfortable 306 to 232 margin in Electoral Votes. But control of the White House depends upon the state-by-state tallies, and these told a very different story.

Incumbent Donald Trump lost Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin by such extremely narrow margins that a swing of less than 22,000 votes in those crucial states would have gotten him reelected. With a record 158 million votes cast, this amounted to a victory margin of around 0.01%. So if just one American voter in 7,000 had changed his mind, Trump might have received another four years in office. One American voter in 7,000.

Such an exceptionally narrow victory is extremely unusual in modern American history. For decades, the very tight Kennedy-Nixon race of 1960 had been a byword for close races, but Biden’s margin of victory was much smaller. More recently, George W. Bush won a narrow reelection over Sen. John F. Kerry in 2004, but Kerry would have required a voter swing nearly five times greater than Trump’s in order to claim victory. Indeed, with the sole exception of the notorious “dangling chads” Florida decision of the 2000 Bush-Gore election, no American presidential candidate in over 100 years had lost by so narrow a voter margin as Donald J. Trump.

If our incompetent or dishonest media had correctly reported these simple facts, perhaps Democratic partisans would have been somewhat more understanding of the outrage expressed by so many of their Republican counterparts, who believed they had been cheated of their election victory. Admittedly, Trump backers seem equally unaware of the historically slender margin of their candidate’s defeat.

The emotions on both sides of the Trump reelection campaign were among the strongest in modern American history, and the outcome was determined by the tiniest sliver of voters in a few states. So under these circumstances, last week’s controversial events in DC were perhaps not so entirely unexpected. Indeed, during the weeks before the election, I’d half-predicted such a scenario, speculating about possible claims of a stolen election and the resulting civil unrest. For example, the following was my response to a question from a longtime commenter:

Many Trump supporters are alleging that there could be massive voting fraud in the 2020 election. Some believe that if Trump is ahead on election night, Democratic machines will manufacture ballots to give a victory to Biden. Do you think this is possible or do you see this as improbable?

Well, I suppose it’s possible…

Frankly, both sides are so totally agitated and extreme, the Trumpists would be saying and believing it, even if it were entirely false and impossible. It’s hard to figure out what’s happening when everyone involved is so dishonest and corrupt. Trump has always seemed like an ignorant buffoon to me, but I think the Democrats and liberals have almost gone insane in their opposition to him.

As I’ve been telling people for weeks, the whole political situation certainly seems very bizarre and I’ve seen some pretty plausible arguments that we might end up with a “disputed” election if the numbers are fairly close in key states. Apparently, the Republicans are overwhelmingly going to be voting in person, while the Democrats will be voting by mail, meaning their ballots will be much slower to come in and be counted.

So Trump could be ahead by wide margins on Election Night and declare victory to the cheers of his partisans. And then as the mail ballots come in, the numbers turn against him, but he and his die-hard supporters cry “Fraud!” and refuse to recognize the result. Hard to say what would happen, but I’m glad I live in California which is generally quiet and peaceful these days.

Obviously, Bush/Gore was “disputed” in 2000, but only party loyalists much cared at the time, while today the country is filled with Trumpists and Trump-haters, both very suspicious and angry.

Although I think my speculative scenario turned out to be reasonably correct, the actual post-election developments were far greater in magnitude than I had expected, and may have dire consequences for maintaining American civil liberties.

I haven’t investigated the matter, but there does seem to be considerable circumstantial evidence of widespread ballot fraud by Democratic Party forces, hardly surprising given the apocalyptic manner in which so many of their leaders had characterized the threat of a Trump reelection. After all, if they sincerely believed that a Trump victory would be catastrophic for America why would they not use every possible means, fair and foul alike, to save our country from that dire fate?

In particular, several of the major swing-states contain large cities—Detroit, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, and Atlanta—that are both totally controlled by the Democratic Party and also notoriously corrupt, and various eye-witnesses have suggested that the huge anti-Trump margins they provided may have been heavily “padded” to ensure the candidate’s defeat.

Even leaving aside some of these plausible claims, the case for a stolen election seems almost airtight. I don’t know or care anything about Dominion voting machines, whether they are controlled by Venezuelan Marxists, Chinese Communists, or Martians. But the most blatant election-theft was accomplished in absolutely plain sight.

Not long before the election, the hard drive of an abandoned laptop owned by Joe Biden’s son Hunter revealed a gigantic international corruption scheme, quite possibility involving the candidate himself. But the facts of this enormous political scandal were entirely ignored and boycotted by virtually every mainstream media outlet. And once they story was finally published in the pages of the New York Post, America’s oldest newspaper, all links to the Post article and its website were suddenly banned by Twitter, Facebook, and other social media outlets to ensure that the voters remained ignorant until after they had cast their ballots.

Renowned international journalist Glenn Greenwald was hardly a Trump partisan, but he became outraged that the editors of the Intercept, the $100 million publication he himself had co-founded, refused to allow him to cover that massive media scandal, and he angrily resigned in protest. In effect, America’s media and tech giants formed a united front to steal the election and somehow drag the crippled Biden/Harris ticket across the finish line.

The Hunter Biden corruption scandal seemed about as serious as any in modern presidential election history and Biden’s official victory margin was just 0.01%. So if the American voters had been allowed to learn the truth, Trump almost certainly would have won the election, quite possibly in an Electoral College landslide. Given these facts, anyone who continues to deny that the election was stolen from Trump is simply being ridiculous.

Heated election campaigns have consequences, and this is especially true when all of America’s most powerful corporations and ruling elites unite to essentially steal a reelection from a populist incumbent, hero-worshiped by many tens of millions of Americans. And when despite all that blatant unfairness and theft, the final margin of defeat is just one vote in 7,000, an explosion of popular outrage should only be expected.

Solid estimates appear unavailable, but it seems that hundreds of thousands of grass-roots Trump supporters traveled to our nation’s capital to protest against what they regarded as a stolen election, and then peacefully assembled to listen to their hero’s speech.

Afterwards, a tiny sliver of this vast multitude of angry individuals—perhaps less than one in a thousand—barged their way into the strangely-undefended Capitol building of Congress, took souvenir selfies, livesteamed their antics, and generally played the role of tourist-protesters while the lawmakers they so despised as corrupt mostly fled or hid. These Trumpists and some of their colorful costumes brought to mind the radical Yippies of the late 1960s.

The previous year had seen an unprecedented wave of violent riots, arson, and looting across some 200 American cities, which our entirely corrupt and dishonest media had generally characterized as “mostly peaceful protests.” In previous years, angry mobs of organized Democratic activists had repeatedly invaded and occupied the Wisconsin Legislature, sometimes winning praise from the media. But when unarmed Trump supporters now did something similar for a few hours in Washington, they were quickly branded “domestic terrorists” seeking to overthrow our democracy.

A video shows Ashli Babbitt, an unarmed female protester, being shot dead by a security guard as she tried to climb through a window, an incident not dissimilar to the famous Kent State shootings of a 1960s campus protest, but hardly treated by the media in a similar manner.

GRAPHIC FOOTAGE: Police fatally shoot a Trump supporter inside the Capitol building. This is a sickening crime that should be prosecuted as such.

— Dan Cohen (@dancohen3000) January 7, 2021

A couple of other Trump protesters, probably elderly, overweight, or in poor health, died of strokes or heart-attacks during all the excitement, and one Capitol police officer later died as well, allegedly struck in the head with a fire-extinguisher although there has been no solid account of the incident. Yet this confused tableau of chaos and popular anger, which recalls scenes from the 1968 Chicago Democratic Convention protests, has been portrayed as a “coup attempt” incited by President Trump, and therefore justifying his second impeachment.

Even more importantly, the incoming Biden/Harris Administration may be considering the most sweeping domestic crackdown upon traditional American civil liberties since the Patriot Act was passed in the hurried aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks twenty years ago. This has been justified by the need to suppress “domestic extremism.”

Even without any new governmental legislation, a remarkable Internet crackdown has already begun. In an absolutely unprecedented development, the sitting president of the United States—who had just lost his reelection by 0.01% of the vote—has been summarily banned by Twitter, Facebook, and all other major social media outlets, preventing him from communicating with his followers, and with many of his leading supporters suffering the same fate. Famed libertarian Ron Paul criticized Twitter for banning Trump, and he was immediately locked out of his own Facebook page. Parler, a young but rapidly growing Twitter competitor, refused to ban Trump, and was immediately driven off the Internet by a combined attack from Apple, Google, and Amazon, possibly never to return. Our Information Age has entered a truly Orwellian period.

These Tech giants have often justified their extreme censorship by expressing the need to combat the spread of the dangerous “conspiracy theories” so widespread among Trump partisans. Particularly demonized by the media is the wildly popular “QAnon” theory, which numbered the unfortunate Ms. Babbitt among its committed followers. Although I’m only very slightly familiar with QAnon, it appears to be a bizarre mishmash of many strange ideas, notably including the belief that our ruling elites heavily consist of exceptionally corrupt and criminal individuals, sometimes even being Satanic pedophiles.

Although much of that doctrine seems like total nonsense to me, we should note the massive suppression this movement has experienced and bear in mind that “the wicked flee when no man pursueth.” And indeed, my own articles over the years have solidly established that many of the seemingly ridiculous elements of QAnon probably contain a very large nugget of truth:

Reprinted with permission from The Unz Review.

The post Our Disputed Election appeared first on LewRockwell.