As the alleged “second wave” of the Coronavirus “pandemic” is reported to be sweeping across Europe in recent weeks, many governments have enthusiastically embraced their totalitarian side and granted themselves sweeping new “emergency powers” alongside new lockdown measures.
The public has been markedly less co-operative this time around. Rebelling against the seemingly arbitrary limitations which are not supported by either science or common sense. Protests have taken place all across the continent.
Thousands of people gathered in Berlin over the last few days, protesting the Merkel government passing a new lockdown law. Police turned water cannons on the crowds, and nearly 200 people were arrested.
According to reliable sources, elements of Antifa rushed to the scene of the Anti-New Normal Totalitarianism protest in Berlin today, hoping to hold the “Corona Deniers” down, so that the cops could hose them real good, but they were just a little too late. pic.twitter.com/RdQ67qYjnN
The mainstream reported “hundreds” of protesters, but as pictures plainly show it was more like tens of thousands:
“Thanks for the picture Majd Abboud, not hundreds, not thousand, but ten’s of thousands protested in Berlin today and it’s only the beginning of something big…” Sonja Van Ende#Covid_19pic.twitter.com/hLxNaTEqYv
After the Prime Minister of Spain Pedro Sanchez declared a sixth-month state of emergency in late October, there were days of protests across the country.
Barcelona, already a hot-bed of anti-government feeling due to the brutal repression of the Catalan Independence referendum, saw violent confrontations between riot police and protestors
Emmanuel Macron’s brand new “comprehensive security law”, known by protesters as the “gag law”, would further militarise French police whilst making it a crime to capture or distribute the image of police officer. It has met fervent resistance in the shape of angry marches through cities across the country.
The anti-lockdown protests in Italy reached a fever pitch in late October, and were probably the most extensive on the continent. Marches occurred in dozens of cities across the country, including Rome, Naples, Genoa and Bologna.
The mainstream media went out fo their way to undercut and smear the protests. CNN and Reuters reported only “hundreds” of protesters. Does this photo have “hundreds” of people in it?
Politico went so far as to actually blame the protests on the Mafia.
Bratislava was home to a huge march of protesters on November 17th, marking the national holiday known as Fight for Freedom Day. These marches were illegal under the Slovakian emergency law, notionally designed to prevent the spread of coronavirus.
BRATISLAVA, SLOVAKIA: Anti-Covid restrictions & anti-government protests despite a ban on public gatherings, on the anniversary of the Velvet Revolution of 1989 & the student demonstration against Nazi occupation of 1939: https://t.co/UzfBlhDoKcpic.twitter.com/oWqhlSTfex
In fact, the media have barely covered the proposed law, and literally not mentioned the protests in Copenhagen at all. A search for “Covid protests Denmark” on google, turns up almost no results relating to that topic.
The reason to cover the Danish protest less than the others is that they apparently worked. and the last thing the establishment wants people to see is that civil disobedience can change anything.
It’s good to see the general public’s fraying sense of patience with a Covid narrative that has never made any sense, and a “pandemic response” which is likely to do far more damage than it ever could prevent.
Though civil unrest is undeniably a good and powerful thing, this is also a time to be wary. If the establishment feel they are losing control of the situation or the narrative, they are likely to double down or try something desperate.
It is an undeniable fact that the republic has entered one of the most dangerous crises of its short existence. This is not only due to the disputed election results of November 3rd, but also to a multitude of other factors beyond American borders, including the global financial crisis which a certain pandemic has unleashed upon the world, and slide towards a major world war between great powers that has accelerated chaotically in recent years.
As unpopular as it might be to state in polite society, as of this writing it is still impossible to state with 100% certainty that Joe Biden will in fact be inaugurated on January 20, 2021. The simple reason for this is that verifiable evidence of vast partisan vote fraud tied to the highest echelons of British Intelligence have mount with every passing day with Dominion voting systems most recently accused of erasing 2.7 million Trump votes across the nation, and giving 220 000 pro-Trump votes given to Biden in Pennsylvania (along with hundreds of other vote counting anomalies and technology glitches across all major swing states). These and other major signs of mass vote fraud have giving rise to reasonable questions of the validity of the official results which will be taken to the courts as Gen. Michael Flynn’s Attorney Sidney Powell eloquently laid out recently.
Trump, Biden and the Oncoming Meltdown
By now most people reading this are aware (or should be aware) that the trans Atlantic financial system has been set to melt down under a $1.5 quadrillion derivatives time bomb being held together by a mix of wishful thinking, hyperinflationary money printing and vast unpayable securitized debts waiting to default. It should also come as no surprise that the Great Reset Agenda designed to coordinate the “post-COVID world order” has nothing to do with any actual pandemic, and everything to do with imposing a new bankers’ dictatorship onto the nations of the earth. If you are uncertain about these claims, I invite you to read my recent study “What the Great Reset Architects Don’t Want you to Know About Economics”.
Both Trump and Biden profess to support American leadership to the world going into this storm, but both men operate on very much opposing paradigms of what this means, and what foreign policy tradition should be activated.
On November 9 the incumbent president fired Mark Esper (possibly to subvert a planned coup) and instated General Christopher Miller to the position of Defense Secretary who has called for a total end to the 19 year Afghan war stating: “we are not a people of perpetual war. It is the antithesis of everything for which we stand and for which our ancestors fought. All wars must end.”
Having vocalized his desires to return the USA to its traditional protectionist, non-interventionist agenda repeatedly over four years, Trump famously characterized the battle at hand as one of “patriots against the globalists.”
And yet, despite these facts, many apparently intelligent people have celebrated that the “bad orange man” has finally been ousted and normality may once again occur.
In an April 2020 Foreign Policy article, Joe Biden called for the re-assertion of American leadership of the world order stating that “for over 70 years, the United States under democratic and republican presidents, played a leading role in writing the rules” of the world order. Predicting the two possible scenarios that will befall the world should the USA continue to “abdicate our leadership” as Trump has done, Biden says that either:
1) Someone else takes America’s place as global hegemon that doesn’t “advance our interests and values or
2) “No one will and chaos will ensue”.
But wait a minute!
Shouldn’t there be a third option in Biden’s crystal ball? What about the option of a world defined by sovereign nations working in win-win cooperation and mutual self interest? Sadly, from a zero-sum mind that can only think in “balance of power” terms, this third scenario cannot exist.
The paradox for such little minds, however is that the very essence of America’s emerging from WWII in a leading position that Biden praises is entirely premised on the understanding that the world is more than a zero sum system.
The Forgotten Multi-Polar Traditions of the USA
From the drafting of the UN Charter in 1941, the formulation of the Bretton Woods system in 1944, to the UN Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, there is no doubt that there is very little that America has not directly influenced.
While this leadership is undeniable and often objectively destructive as sin, it is too easily forgotten that the UN Charter, as outlined by Franklin Roosevelt was premised on the belief that America must never become an empire but merely help those in need by providing the means of industrial development. This was essentially understood as the internationalization of the New Deal which included social safety nets, bank regulation, productive work guarantees and infrastructure projects to all other nations aspiring independence across Africa, Asia and the Americas or struggling the heal from the destructive effects of the war.
FDR’s vision for the IMF/World Bank mandates were never to reconquer poor nations under a new system of debt slavery and conditionalities, but to extend productive credit for long term megaprojects that were in the common aims of mankind and which angered Churchill immensely.
Most importantly, this vision was premised on the need for a trust-based U.S.-Russia-China alliance that never would have permitted the emergence of a bipolar Cold War.
Working alongside such anti-imperial co-thinkers as Republican leader Wendell Willkie, Vice President Henry Wallace, economist Harry Dexter White, confidante Harry Hopkins, Asst. Secretary of State Sumner Welles and Attorney General Robert Jackson (to name a few), this small but powerful group of patriots representing both parties, worked vigorously to ensure not only that the Wall Street/City of London Frankenstein Monster of Nazism would be put down but that Churchill’s vision of a restored British Imperial system would not succeed.
Unlike the earlier “League of Nations” which intended to destroy all national sovereignty in the wake of WWI, the United Nations was always meant to become a platform for dialogue, and economic multilateral trust-building much more in harmony with the multipolar alliance now sweeping the world (and scaring the hell out of the thing that controls Joe Biden).
“To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace
To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;
To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion; and
To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.”
These principles were expanded even further to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on December 10, 1948 which re-iterated the founding principles of America’s Declaration of Independence- extending those unalienable rights to all mankind as FDR envisioned stating in its preamble:
“Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,
“Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,
“Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,
“Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,
“Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,
“Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,
“Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,
“Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.”
Now admittedly this positive American foreign policy outlook which launched the post-war age is a far cry from anything the world has come to recognize in the USA since the emergence of the Cold War… and especially since the murder of John F Kennedy who had done much to resist America’s full takeover by this newly revised British Empire (which some have chosen in recent years to label “the deep state”).
Much like the U.S. Constitution itself, these principles largely remained ink on parchment as a new age of Cold Warriors, Rhodes Scholars and Fabians directed from British Intelligence created NATO, divided the world among the lighter skinned haves and darker skinned have nots while unleashing a system of endless wars onto the earth under a new Pax Americana.
Today a small window is still open for a renewal of the forgotten traditions of the American republican traditions that were upheld by such leaders as John Quincy Adams, Lincoln, Grant, Garfield, McKinley, Harding, FDR and JFK. President Trump has clearly taken a stand in opposition to the reconquest of the republic by the deep state and it remains to be seen if the American people have the fortitude to do everything in their power to organize themselves in defense of the republic and civilization more generally.
After a handful of employees quit so they could speak out about Facebook’s insufficient internal ‘woke’-ness, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has finally decided how he’s going to handle what has been described as an internal rebellion.
The surge of anti-management sentiment within the company was likely provoked by accusations, spread by the mainstream press, about Facebook’s alleged role in spreading “Russian” disinformation to help sway the election to President Trump, a narrative that the New Yorker – a publication that’s almost revered by American intellectuals – quietly admitted was b***s*** just a few days ago.
After hyping the Russia threat for four years, the New Yorker quietly wonders if the story might have been exaggerated:https://t.co/j40JLJNGHD
Though Facebook has, like other social media companies, picked on conservatives, there’s little question that conservative voices are given more space on the company’s platform. That’s not wrong; it’s simply in keeping with American principles about freedom of the press.
Zuck showed surprising resoluteness in handling these accusations, until recently, when he finally caved, ordering a so ineffective-it’s-almost-humorous “ban” on new political ads during the final week of campaign season.
And now, the company has informed employees in a memo that was also promptly leaked to the press, that it has decided on a new strategy for handling internal dissent. Because while the US is governed by the Constitution, inside Facebook, Zuck calls the shots. And he’s decided that he will essentially silence all discussion about “sensitive” topics on the company’s internal messaging system, CNBC reports.
Ironically, Zuckerberg reportedly described these new rules, which will explicitly identify where conversations about certain topics can be held, as giving the company’s employees more freedom, not less. Facebook is couching this as giving employees “the option” of joining certain debates, rather than have them thrust into their feeds.
Even when these conversations are held, they will be “carefully monitored”.
“We deeply value expression and open discussion. What we’ve heard from our employees is that they want the option to join debates on social and political issues rather than see them unexpectedly in their work feed,” said Facebook Spokesman Joe Osborne to CNBC. “We’re updating our employee policies and work tools to ensure our culture remains respectful and inclusive.”
From now on, inside Facebook so-called “tense conversations” – as Zuckerberg himself described them – will simply not be held. Then, employees won’t have anything to get angry about.
Because that’s how we do things in contemporary America.
One day after a report that a respected Chinese virologist fled Hong Kong to accuse Beijing of a COVID cover-up, former Trump strategist Steve Bannon told the Daily Mail that scientists from the Wuhan Institute of Virology and other labs have defected to the West and are “turning over evidence” against the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) for their role in the COVID-19 pandemic which has claimed over 560,000 lives worldwide since last December.
“People are going to be shocked,” Bannon told the Mail (“from a yacht off the East coast of America,” the Mail would like us to know).
The 66-year-old then said that defectors are cooperating with intelligence agencies in America, Europe and the UK, which have been assembling evidence to challenge the CCP claim that the pandemic originated in a wet market – not in a lab home to scientists who have come under fire for manipulating bat coronavirus to be more transmissible to humans.
“I think that they [spy agencies] have electronic intelligence, and that they have done a full inventory of who has provided access to that lab. I think they have very compelling evidence. And there have also been defectors,” he said. “People around these labs have been leaving China and Hong Kong since mid-February. [US intelligence] along with MI5 and MI6 are trying to build a very thorough legal case, which may take a long time. It’s not like James Bond.”
Mr Bannon even suggested that the French government, which helped to build the institute, had left behind monitoring systems after Beijing shut them out of the project before it opened in 2017. –Daily Mail
“The thing was built with French help, so don’t think that there aren’t some monitoring devices in there. I think what you are going to find out is that these guys were doing experiments which they weren’t fully authorized [for] or knew what they were doing and that somehow, either through an inadvertent mistake, or on a lab technician, one of these things got out,” Bannon continued. “It’s not that hard for these viruses to get out. That is why these labs are so dangerous.”
“You essentially had a biological Chernobyl in Wuhan, but the center of gravity, the Ground Zero, was around the Wuhan lab, in terms of the casualty rates. And like Chernobyl, you also had the cover-up – the state apparatus reports to itself and just protects itself.”
Mr Bannon, who has close links to Guo Wengui, an exiled Chinese billionaire, told this newspaper: ‘Regardless of whether it came out of the market or the Wuhan lab, the Chinese Communist party’s subsequent decisions hold them guilty of pre-meditated murder.
‘We know this because Taiwan formally informed the WHO on December 31 that there was some sort of epidemic coming out of Hubei province [where Wuhan is]. The CDC in Beijing was informed on January 2 or 3, and they decided to withhold that information and then sign a trade deal [with the US on January 15].
‘If they had been straightforward and truthful in the last week of December, 95 per cent of the lives lost and the economic carnage would have been contained. –Daily Mail
“That is the tragedy here. They used the time to scoop up all the world’s personal protective equipment. This is a murderous dictatorship. The blood is [also] on the hands of the world’s corporations – the investment banks, the hedge funds and the pension funds – and it is time to start calling it out before it leads to the destruction of the West,” Bannon elaborated. “We are in the most extraordinary crisis in modern American history, more than Vietnam, the Cold War, even the Second World War. A global pandemic and an economic inferno. I have no faith in the WHO, the leadership should face criminal charges and be shut down.”
One has to wonder if China will respond with whistleblowers from Ft. Detrick to support their narrative?
One year after China did not import even one ounce of US soybeans as the trade feud was escalating at the end of 2018, in November 2019, China – which has found itself roiled by soaring food prices – saw its imports of US soybeans surge to the highest in 20 months after more American cargoes cleared customs ahead of the alleged signing of the Phase One trade deal in January.
According to data from China’s Customs Administration, China’s inbound shipments from the U.S. more than doubled to 2.6 million tons, the highest since March 2018, and up from about 1.1 million tons in October. As noted above, in November of 2018 – when the trade war between the two nations was escalating rapidly – China imported no U.S. soybeans.
As Bloomberg notes, citing USDA data, China’s total commitments in the current marketing year hit 10.5 million tons, compared with just 2 million tons the previous year.
That said, the surge in US soybean imports was not some trade war concession aimed at the US because as US imports jumped, so did China’s imports from its top Latin American markets: specifically, in November, China bought bought 3.9 million tons of soybeans from Brazil, Beijing’s largest supplier, up from 3.8 million tons in October and 5.1 million tons in November last year; imports from Argentina also rose from 959,936 tons in October to 1.4 million tons, and up from a tiny 36,119 tons in November last year.
According to China’s National Grain and Oils Information Center, December imports may climb to about 9 million tons following more shipments from U.S., which could ease supply shortages at some crushers.
And while China is unlikely to order less soybean from either Brazil or Argentina any time soon as the two nations have emerged as the two key supply chain alternatives to the US, where any trade goodwill may be undone with stroke of a tweet, Bloomberg notes that Chinese companies are likely to continue purchasing American soybeans especially if the two countries sign the partial trade deal in early January, in line with the market’s expectations.
There is also China’s desperation to repopulate its decimated pig population and to do that, Beijing needs access to all the soybeans it can get. It explains why China has been issuing regular tariff waivers (which cover 30% of the retaliatory tariffs on US soybeans) for domestic firms to buy U.S. soybeans.
That said, China was quick to pretend like the surge in US soybean purchases was in fact some concession, and shortly after the news of the import jump hit, China’s infamous twitter troll, Global Times editor Hu Xijin, tweeted “congrats to US farmers” adding a tacit threat that US farmers should “prod” the US government to sign the Phase One deal if they want China’s vital goodwill to continue, to wit: “meanwhile please prod the US government, making sure the two countries can sign phase one deal smoothly and the next trade talks continue to make progress. This is vital to stabilize China’s purchase of US farm products.”
Congrats to US farmers. Meanwhile please prod the US government, making sure the two countries can sign phase one deal smoothly and the next trade talks continue to make progress. This is vital to stabilize China’s purchase of US farm products. https://t.co/cPycSBlNSQ
What he really meant was that China, where we will soon need a bigger chart to show soaring food hyperinflation (and middle-class anger at surging good prices) is desperate to buy US agricultural products to keep prices lower, and with every passing months, Trump’s negotiating leverage rises in lockstep with Chinese food inflation.
He also really meant “congrats to Chinese farmers” for procuring the soybeans they so urgently need if they are to have any hope of restocking China’s most popular protein: pork.
The final 2020 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) passed the House on Wednesday 377-48 at a massive and unprecedented $738 billion, in a nearly united Republican vote which also included over 180 House Democrats. It marks a $22 billion spending increase for the Pentagon.
It’s expected to be signed by President Trump likely next week after it goes through the Senate, after it was stripped of all significant items the administration would find objectionable, including a controversial War Powers Act resolution meant to end US involvement in Yemen and which would would have required Congressional approval for military action against Iran.
Interestingly, the House bill also removed language that blocked the Pentagon from researching low-yield nuclear weapons, and the House also backed away from controversial border wall restrictions.
Long sought after sanctions targeting Russia’s Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline to Germany were added. Trump had previously accused Berlin of handing “billions” of dollars to the Russians to the detriment of Ukraine, whose gas transit facilities will be bypassed by the new Gazprom spearheaded venture, set for completion within months. Expanded and severe new sanctions were also added against Syria, known as the ‘Caesar bill’.
In a history making win for Trump, the agreement would add a new armed service, dedicated to space, under Title 10 of U.S. Code, which was an action the White House saw as pivotal to solidifying it as a fully independent military branch. The Space Force would be housed within the Air Force and led by the chief of space operations, who would report directly to the Air Force secretary and be a member of the Joint Chiefs.
Meanwhile, the most vocal progressive Democrat opponent of the massive defense spending bill, Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), had this to say in a floor speech ahead of Wednesday’s vote: “there are many things you can call the bill, but it’s Orwellian to call it progressive.”
“Let’s speak in facts,” said Khanna. “This defense budget is $120 billion more than what Obama left us with. That could fund free public college for every American. It could fund access to high-speed, affordable internet for every American. But it’s worse. The bipartisan amendment to stop the war in Yemen: stripped by the White House. The bipartisan amendment to stop the war in Iran: stripped by the White House.”
Indeed, the most worrisome aspect to the new NDAA is that it makes it easier for the White House to go to war with Iran, at a moment tensions continue to soar.
If Russia spending $100,000 on Facebook ads constitutes election interference, and Donald Trump asking Ukraine to investigate the Bidens is too – then Hillary Clinton takes the cake when it comes to influence campaigns designed to harm a political opponent.
Contained within Monday’s FISA report by the DOJ Inspector General is the revelation that Fusion GPS, the firm paid by the Clinton campaign to produce the Steele dossier, “was paying Steele to discuss his reporting with the media.” (P. 369 and elsewhere)
And when did Steele talk with the media (which got him fired as an FBI source)? September of 2016, roughly six weeks before the election.
One of the more damaging articles to result from these meetings was authored by Yahoo News journalist Michael Isikoff, who said in an interview that he was invited by Fusion GPS to meet a “secret source” at a Washington restaurant.
That secret source was none other than Christopher Steele, a former MI-6 Russia expert who fed the Isikoff information for a September 23, 2016 article – which would have had far greater reach and impact coming from such a widely-read media outlet vs. $100,000 in Russian-bought Facebook ads.
Isikoff’s article claimed that former Trump campaign aide Carter Page “has opened up private communications with senior Russian officials – including talks about the possible lifting of economic sanctions if the Republican nominee becomes president.”
This allegaton was found by special counsel Robert Mueller report to be false. Moreover, the FBI knew about it in December, 2016, when DOJ #4 Bruce Ohr told the agency as much.
“Steele told us that in September [of 2016] her and Simpson gave an “off-the-record” briefing to a small number of journalists about his reporting,” reads page 165 of the FISA report, which says that Steele “acknowledged that Yahoo News was identified in one of the court filings in the foreign litigation as being present.”
Put another way, Hillary Clinton paid Christopher Steele to feed information to the MSM in order to harm Donald Trump right before the 2016 election. Granted, there were intermediaries; the Clinton campaign paid law firm Perkins Coie, which paid Fusion GPS, which paid Steele. And if asked, we’re guessing Clinton would claim she had no idea this happened – which, quite frankly, simply isn’t plausible given the stakes.
Whatever the case – the act of Simpson paying Steele to peddle fiction to the media for the purpose of harming Trump, by itself, constitutes blatant election meddling by every standard set by the left over the past three years.
We’re sure Hillary can explain that if and when she jumps into the 2020 race.
After months of dodging questions over her income, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) revealed on Sunday night that she made nearly $2 million from legal consulting for corporate clients while she was a law professor at Harvard, the University of Pennsylvania and other law schools, starting in 1995.
The income included $212,000 for representing Travelers Indemnity Co. in 2009, $190,000 for representing a department store chain, and $80,000 doing bankruptcy work for Enron creditors.
For instance, the documents released Sunday show that Warren made about $80,000 from work she did for creditors in the energy company Enron’s bankruptcy and $20,000 as a consultant for Dow Chemical, a company that was trying to limit the liability it faced from silicone breast implants that were made by a connected firm. –Washington Post
What the Post did not make immediately clear, however, is that Warren made all this money over the span of 17 years (“the figures disclosed Sunday show that nearly all of the money was made from cases filed after she got her job at Harvard in 1995”) – drawing immediate criticism from many who suggested that WaPo’s failure to highlight the time frame until the sixth paragraph was unfair.
Here's about $400k of it (Twitter only has four pics at a time), made helping plaintiffs sue illegal debt collectors, asbestos manufacturers, Philip Morris, and national banks, but go off. pic.twitter.com/yfzM3v7P3b
Deep down I’m sure even he knows that this is BS reporting and an unfair interpretation of Warren’s income. Somehow, I feel like there was internal pressure from his editors to dial up the attacks. It’s not beneath them.
— Marlo Stanfield to y'all, Meemus to my friends. (@BogusPogus15) December 9, 2019
Twitter has written “shadow banning” aka, censorship, into their new terms. The platform will now intentionally “limit the visibility” of some users. Expect those who dissent from the official narrative to be the ones censored.
Critics have accused Twitter of censorship for quite some time now. But this time, it’s official. The company has admitted they will attempt to silence those critical of the ruling class. According to RT, the news terms will be taking effect in January of 2020. While the new terms don’t look like much to write home about, some tweaks to the language could have larger repercussions for users, limiting their reach behind the scenes without their knowledge.
“We may also remove or refuse to distribute any Content on the Services, limit distribution or visibility of any Content on the service, suspend or terminate users, and reclaim usernames without liability to you,” the new terms state.
The social media giant is telling users that it reserves the right shadow ban or “throttle” or censor certain accounts. And it is not clear on what basis will it make those decisions, although we guess (based on their past which is rife with censorship) that accounts that aren’t parroting the government’s official narrative will be on the list.
While Twitter has previously insisted point-blank “we do not shadow ban,” in the pre-2020 terms the company split hairs between shadow banning and “ranking” posts to determine their prominence on the site, and acknowledged deliberately down-ranking “bad-faith actors” to limit their visibility.
In January 2018, conservative media watchdog group Project Veritas published footage showing Abhinov Vadrevu, a former Twitter software engineer, discussing shadow banning as a “strategy” the company was at least considering, if not already using. “One strategy is to shadow ban so you have ultimate control. The idea of a shadow ban is that you ban someone but they don’t know they’ve been banned because they keep posting and no one sees their content,” Vadrevu said. “So they just think that no one is engaging with their content when in reality, no one is seeing it.”
The new terms will make shadow bans an official policy, all but guaranteeing continued cries of bias and censorship from the platform’s many critics will be silenced.
Ukrainian gas giant Burisma leveraged their relationship with Hunter Biden in order to curry favor with the Obama State Department in 2016, according to the Wall Street Journal, citing documents released in response to a Freedom of Information Act request submitted by journalist John Solomon.
Burisma, represented by American lobbying firm Blue Star Strategies (founded by former Clinton administration officials Sally Painter and Karen Tramontano), mentioned Hunter Biden’s name in email exchanges with State Department staff while seeking a meeting – ” then mentioned him again during the meeting as part of an effort to improve Burisma’s image in Washington,” according to the report.
The email exchanges between State Department staffers show that Karen Tramontano, chief executive of Blue Star, cited Mr. Biden’s position in trying to secure a meeting with a senior official at the State Department.
“She noted that two high profile U.S. citizens are affiliated with the company (including Hunter Biden as a board member),” the special assistant at the Office of the Undersecretary for Economic Growth, Energy and the Environment wrote in the Feb. 24, 2016, email.
Ms. Tramontano met with the undersecretary, Catherine Novelli, on March 1, 2016, the documents show. During the meeting, Ms. Tramontano mentioned Mr. Biden served on the company’s board, according to a former State Department official familiar with the discussion. –Wall Street Journal
The 2016 lobbying effort was an attempt to change Burisma’s reputation in Washington.
Hunter Biden was appointed to the board of Burisma in 2014 while his father was Vice President, and Obama’s ‘point man’ on Ukraine policy. The elder Biden notoriously pressured Ukraine’s president to fire the country’s lead prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, who was leading a wide-ranging investigation into Burisma at the time. While MSM outlets have reported that the probe had been long-closed by the time, however Shokin said in a sworn affidavit “I was forced out because I was leading a wide-range corruption probe into Burisma Holdings, a natural gas firm active in Ukraine, and Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, was a member of the board of directors.”
Blue Star’s efforts for Burisma came as the company and its Ukrainian tycoon founder, Mykola Zlochevsky, faced investigations in Ukraine focused on allegations of tax irregularities, money laundering and illegal enrichment
Mr. Zlochevsky was never charged, and a lawyer for Burisma said at the time that the investigations were closed because of a lack of evidence.
The dropping of the investigations in 2016 came after Ukraine’s prosecutor general was dismissed. Vice President Biden and European Union officials had brought pressure on the prosecutor, seeing him as a hindrance to anticorruption efforts. His dismissal has been seized upon by Mr. Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani as evidence that Vice President Biden exerted undue pressure on Kyiv to help his son. –Wall Street Journal
Amazing, nobody cites Shokin’s affidavit claiming he was fired for investigating Burisma.
House Democrats, meanwhile, have been conducting an impeachment inquiry against President Trump, whose attorney Rudy Giuliani has been conducting an investigation “concerning 2016 Ukrainian collusion and corruption,” which Giuliani says “was done solely as a defense attorney to defend my client against false charges.”
The evidence, when revealed fully, will show that this present farce is as much a frame-up and hoax as Russian collusion, maybe worse, and will prove the President is innocent.