Previous month:
January 24, 2021 - January 30, 2021
Next month:
February 7, 2021 - February 13, 2021

WOW: THE LEFT ADMITS THE 2020 ELECTION CONSPIRACY

BIDEN-EO-FIAT

A progressive publication admits that there was a conspiracy, and legislative tricks and propaganda won the election for Biden…

1280px-Time_Magazine_logo.svg

hdr

There was a conspiracy unfolding behind the scenes, one that both curtailed the protests and coordinated the resistance from CEOs. Both surprises were the result of an informal alliance between left-wing activists and business titans. The pact was formalized in a terse, little-noticed joint statement of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and AFL-CIO published on Election Day. Both sides would come to see it as a sort of implicit bargain–inspired by the summer’s massive, sometimes destructive racial-justice protests–in which the forces of labor came together with the forces of capital to keep the peace and oppose Trump’s assault on democracy.

The handshake between business and labor was just one component of a vast, cross-partisan campaign to protect the election–an extraordinary shadow effort dedicated not to winning the vote but to ensuring it would be free and fair, credible and uncorrupted.

[OCS: Free and fair, credible and uncorrupted – but favoring a radical, corrupt, and impaired Democrat candidate who did little or no campaigning and lied about his shifting positions on almost every issue.]

For more than a year, a loosely organized coalition of operatives scrambled to shore up America’s institutions as they came under simultaneous attack from a remorseless pandemic and an autocratically inclined President. Though much of this activity took place on the left, it was separate from the Biden campaign and crossed ideological lines, with crucial contributions by nonpartisan and conservative actors. The scenario the shadow campaigners were desperate to stop was not a Trump victory. It was an election so calamitous that no result could be discerned at all, a failure of the central act of democratic self-governance that has been a hallmark of America since its founding.

[OCS: Yes, the activity was mostly on the left and did include establishment Republicans who were shut out of power and access to generate profit – the anti-Trumpers.

The calamitous nature of the election was created by these very same people who relaxed identification requirements, verifications checks and implemented illegally and unconstitutionally altered election laws to enable large-scale mail ballots, extended deadlines, and the consolidation of counting centers into mega-centers where poll watchers could observe not everything.]

Their work touched every aspect of the election. They got states to change voting systems and laws and helped secure hundreds of millions in public and private funding. They fended off voter-suppression lawsuits, recruited armies of poll workers and got millions of people to vote by mail for the first time. They successfully pressured social media companies to take a harder line against disinformation and used data-driven strategies to fight viral smears. They executed national public-awareness campaigns that helped Americans understand how the vote count would unfold over days or weeks, preventing Trump’s conspiracy theories and false claims of victory from getting more traction. After Election Day, they monitored every pressure point to ensure that Trump could not overturn the result. “The untold story of the election is the thousands of people of both parties who accomplished the triumph of American democracy at its very foundation,” says Norm Eisen, a prominent lawyer and former Obama Administration official who recruited Republicans and Democrats to the board of the Voter Protection Program.

This is the inside story of the conspiracy to save the 2020 election, based on access to the group.

That’s why the participants want the secret history of the 2020 election told, even though it sounds like a paranoid fever dream–a well-funded cabal of powerful people, ranging across industries and ideologies, working together behind the scenes to influence perceptions, change rules and laws, steer media coverage and control the flow of information. They were not rigging the election; they were fortifying it. And they believe the public needs to understand the system’s fragility in order to ensure that democracy in America endures.

[OCS: It should scare every American that this cabal was trying to influence perceptions (psyops), steer media coverage, and control the flow of information (propaganda).

Wordplay – “they were not rigging the election, they were ‘fortifying’ it.” If you are altering the system, you are rigging it to favor your ideology and desired outcome. And the outcome was “No Trump” which benefits the radical progressive Democrats.]

THE ARCHITECT

Sometime in the fall of 2019, Mike Podhorzer became convinced the election was headed for disaster–and determined to protect it.

This was not his usual purview. For nearly a quarter-century, Podhorzer, senior adviser to the president of the AFL-CIO, the nation’s largest union federation, has marshaled the latest tactics and data to help its favored candidates win elections.

[OCS: How many people know that the head of the AFL-CIO, Richard Trumka, is a communist sympathizer if not a communist?

Trumka, Sweeney and Chavez-Thompson also rescinded a founding AFL-CIO rule that banned Communist Party members and loyalists from leadership positions within the Federation and its unions. Instead, the “New Voice” triumvirate welcomed Communist Party delegates to positions of power in the Federation. This move to open the previously patriotic union to subversives delighted the CPUSA, which declared itself “in complete accord” with the troika’s new AFL-CIO program. “The radical shift in both leadership and policy is a very positive, even historic change,” wrote CPUSA National Chairman Gus Hall in 1996 about the Trumka/Sweeney/Chavez-Thompson takeover.
All told, Trumka’s AFL-CIO disseminated 28.6 million pieces of literature promoting Democrats in the 2010 midterms. In one letter, Trumka told union members that “as bad as things are, they can get a whole lot worse.” In the end, Democrats suffered one of the most decisive midterm election defeats in American history, losing 6 Senate seats, more than 60 House seats, and 7 governorships. But Trumka was unfazed. The day after the elections, he credited labor unions for having helped Democrats retain a majority in the Senate, albeit a slim one. “We did our job,” he said. “I think [Democrats] are cognizant of what we did and if they aren’t they should pay heed to it.” Moreover, Trumka portrayed the election results as a “mandate for creating jobs and fixing the economy” and as a repudiation of Republican policies. Communist Party USA Labor Commission chairman Scott Marshall, meanwhile, proudly emphasized that his organization had worked hard with Trumka to promote Democrat candidates. <Source>

To read more <Source>]

Why are the progressives now admitting that there was a group that conspired to alter the election dynamics?

With election cases headed to the Supreme Court, lawsuits pursuing discovery, and credible journalists finding time to write books, the truth will come out. So the progressive socialist democrats are conditioning the media battlefield by acknowledging some of the events that have taken place. Part of a steady slow-drip of information that will allow the denial of a “secret” cabal because the mainstream media clearly disseminated the information. Followed by Hillary Clinton’s favorite line, “Old news – move along.”

Bottom line…

Who is going to investigate the manipulation of our elections? The Biden Administration? I think not!

Who is going to restore integrity to the election process? The Biden Administration?

What are the Republicans going to do with this information? Not a damn thing if they follow the historical pattern and practice of the modern GOP.

Remember the old quote, “Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you.”

We are so screwed.

-- steve


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS



THE CONTINUING ASSAULT ON OUR CONSTITUTION

If there are two things the progressive socialist democrats and their communist backers cannot stand, they are:

(1)  The Constitution’s First Amendment...

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

(2)   The Constitution’s Second Amendment…

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Both work in concert to prevent your inalienable rights from being restricted or denied by a tyrannical government, in this case, a government that appears to be ruled by an elite class comprised of the wealthy, the well-connected, academics, and the power brokers.

All governmental transgressions are given suitable justification by academics in love with socialism/communism for their unconstitutional actions and absolution when they transgress moral and legal bounds. Aided and abetted by mainstream media and technology platforms that need government in some manner. Perhaps regulations to stifle competition and disruptive influences. Perhaps to maintain a near-monopoly in the face of restrictive and unfair business practices. Perhaps to secure funding or tax advantages by contracts, grants, awards, or tax relief through tax credits and allowances. Or perhaps, to be left alone while they continue their rapacious activities.

Should we be worried about the Biden Administration when one of the most prominent business daily newspaper in the nation notes…

wsj-hdr

Liberalism’s Ministry of Truth
Academics and the progressive press mull state media controls.

The academic establishment and progressive press want you to know two things: First, conservative claims of social-media bias are bogus. As Silicon Valley firms police content, their decisions are, miraculously, wholly uninfluenced by ideological preference.

Second, there is an urgent need for a much wider crackdown on political speech, perhaps led by the Biden Administration and requiring the creation of new government agencies. In other words, all that conservative suppression that’s, er, not happening? We need more of it.

Flush with power, they’re now suggesting that government should police the flow of ideas and assume the authority to define reality itself. So bring on the truth commissions. And if any political minority group complains that the Ministry of Truth is biased, worry not—the reality czar can make quick work of such disinformation. <Source>

Cited in the article is one of those “academic studies” from a liberal educational institution that speaks of academic freedom and free speech but squelches both in the name of fairness, equality, diversity, and protecting snowflakes from traumatic trigger words and hate speech.

The article from New York University’s Stern Center for Business and Human Rights titled, “False Accusation: The Unfounded Claim that Social Media Companies Censor Conservatives.” is a prime example of disinformation.

fa-1

Some excerpts from the “Executive Summary” …

Conservatives commonly accuse the major social media companies of censoring the political right. In response to Twitter’s decision on January 8, 2021, to exclude him from the platform, then-President Donald Trump accused the company of “banning free speech” in coordination with “the Democrats and Radical Left.”

This accusation—that social media platforms suppress conservatives— riles a Republican base that has long distrusted the mainstream media and is prone to seeing public events as being shaped by murky liberal plots.

But the claim of anti-conservative  animus is itself a form of disinformation:
a falsehood with no reliable evidence to support it.
No trustworthy largescale studies have determined that conservative content is being removed for ideological reasons or that searches are being manipulated to favor liberal interests.

[OCS: I guess something remains false or constitutes disinformation unless it is the subject of a largescale study by academics—even those with an observable progressive socialist democrat bias.

So let us consider just one blatant example where verifiable true and accurate information was removed for ideological purposes. To wit, the existence of Hunter Biden’s laptop and some of the information it contained was removed before the election. Twitter claiming it was obtained by hacking – which it clearly was not. In fact, the hard drive was in possession of the FBI with a court-acceptable chain of custody.

“The New York Post [OCS: the oldest newspaper in the nation and a extremely credible source] eventually used information in the hard drive, unbeknownst to Isaac, while also including a photo of his store, in a viral exposé, the suit alleges. However, when the Post attempted to disseminate its exposé on the social media platform, Twitter locked its account.

Twitter claimed the story violated its rules against the “distribution of hacked material,” the complaint claimed. The materials in the laptop included several graphic images and private emails, it said.”

Since they had taken no action on Hillary Clinton’s hacked emails, the information was clearly suppressed for political and ideological liberal interests before the election.]

Trump has been the leading purveyor of the bias accusation, but it will not recede with the end of his presidency. In his quest to remain politically relevant, Trump almost certainly will continue to press the case via far-right media channels and/or right-wing online platforms like Parler and Gab.

[OCS: Parler? Do you mean the free-speech platform that was challenging Twitter and was de-platformed by Amazon allegedly acting in illegal concert with other tech infrastructure companies? Another extreme example of the suppression of free speech.]

The statement “The claim of anticonservative animus on the part of social media companies is itself a form of disinformation: a falsehood with no reliable evidence to support it.” is a self-serving example of disinformation – the “big lie.”

So what is the real purpose behind this bogus report…

The report’s authors provide the answer on the first page.

“On a policy level, the bias claim serves as a basis for Republican attacks on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, the federal law that protects platforms from liability associated with user posts and content moderation decisions.”

Exactly the point—the tech companies are immune from defamation lawsuits based on third-party content posted to their platforms when they act as a neutral platform. However, when they moderate or control third-party content posted to their platforms, they act as “publishers” and lose Section 230 protections. Suddenly they are massively liable for all content, which poses an existential risk to their multi-billion-dollar business.

Bottom line…

I believe that they are currying favor with the progressive socialist democrats to extend Section 230 protections even after it is apparent they violated the spirit and the letter of the law for ideological and other purposes. These are the tech tyrants that are complicit in killing free speech.

As for the Second Amendment, witness a hysterical House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Leader Chuck Schumer as they want fencing and military troops in the Capitol to protect them from law-abiding American citizens attempting to redress their grievances with a peaceable protest. I am not sure that the riot was not instigated by the far left to give legitimacy to the coming repressive actions of the Biden Administration. Clearly the most radical, enemy-friendly administration in modern history. Watch for a major push to disarm all law-abiding Americans while releasing criminals into our communities. Of course, hoping that “We the People” will be willing to surrender more of our freedoms for an unenforceable promise of safety from a more authoritarian government.

Have you noticed that everyone assumes that the disinformation is coming mostly from the right when the absolute truth is that disinformation originates in abundance from both sides?

We are so screwed.

-- steve

parler


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS



UN-AMERICAN HOUSE IMPEACHMENT MANAGERS VIOLATE THEIR OATH OF OFFICE

All of the House impeachment managers took the same oath of office and swore to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States."

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God”

So why do these corrupt and dishonest louts insist they have the right to violate the Constitution in their impeachment brief?

(EXCERPT FROM) TRIAL MEMORANDUM OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IN THE IMPEACHMENT TRIAL OF PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP

D. Free Speech

The First Amendment exists to protect our democratic system. It supports the right to vote
and ensures robust public debate. But rights of speech and political participation mean little if the President can provoke lawless action if he loses at the polls.

[OCS: We do not have a democratic system, we have a republic with representational governance. We have a system of checks and balances to prevent a pure democracy, which could easily devolve into a mobocracy. The First Amendment exists so people can speak in opposition to our government or its actions – which President Trump did on occasion. ]

President Trump’s incitement of deadly violence to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power, and to overturn the results of the election, was therefore a direct assault on core First Amendment principles.

[OCS: One,  these are allegations, not statements of fact. The degree to which they are fallacious was the purpose of the impeachment inquiry, which was hurried and deeply flawed; and two, there is nothing in the First Amendment that speaks to this issue which is covered elsewhere in the law.]

Holding him accountable through conviction on the article of impeachment would vindicate First Amendment freedoms— which certainly offer no excuse or defense for President Trump’s destructive conduct.

[OCS: If one was honest, there are many Democrats, while Members of Congress, that have been recorded as saying things far worse and with more immediacy than what the President is alleged to have said.

It is utter nonsense to say that this proceeding “vindicates First Amendment Freedoms” because it surely does not, as the First Amendment is what it purports to be and does not require vindication of any kind.

Are these allegedly learned bozos suggesting that the First Amendment does not apply to these proceedings or that President Trump does not have First Amendment rights?]

Most fundamentally, the First Amendment protects private citizens from the government; it does not protect government officials from accountability for their own abuses in office.

[OCS: I call bullshit. The U.S. Constitution protects all U.S. citizens all of the time, and the capacity in which they serve, except for the military, is of no consequence. There are no provisions in the First Amendment regarding an office holder’s conduct while in office.]

Therefore, as scholars from across the political spectrum have recognized, the First Amendment does not apply at all to an impeachment proceeding.

[OCS: This is pure and unadulterated bullshit.

Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech. How can the First Amendment not apply to an impeachment? This says that the President can be impeached even if his speech was protected by the First Amendment. CONGRESS HAS NO AUTHORITY OR POWER TO VIOLATE THE FIRST AMENDMENT, PERIOD!

No legislative or legal procedure nullifies the Constitution’s First Amendment, with the limited exceptions for the military.

How many of these so-called scholars are actually unbiased, non-partisan constitutional scholars? How many are virulently anti-Trump elite professors who have been so wrong on their legal interpretations and welcome limited freedom socialism with open arms?]

In this case, the question is not whether to inflict liability or punishment on a private citizen; instead, the Senate must decide whether to safeguard the Nation’s constitutional order by disqualifying an official who committed egregious misconduct.

[OCS: Yes, that is precisely the question. Because the Senate is not a judicial body nor has the duties of the Supreme Court, it has no jurisdiction to try and punish a private individual other than to compel, by subpoena, their appearance in certain fact-finding circumstances necessary for legislation.

Likewise, The Senate does more to destroy rather than safeguard the Nation’s constitutional order.]

As one scholar writes, “the First Amendment does not shrink the scope of the impeachment power or alter what conduct would fall within the terms of high and misdemeanors.” Indeed, the notion that a President can attack our democracy, provoke violence, and interfere with the Electoral College so long as he does so through statements advocating such lawlessness would have astonished the Framers. They wrote the impeachment provisions of the Constitution to guard against any presidential conduct that constitutes a great and dangerous offense against the Nation—no matter the means for carrying out that malfeasance.

[OCS: Impeachment applies to any constitutional officer in power – with the goal of removal – Trump is already out of office – so there is no justification for this trial as no remedy exists. Additionally, the part about preventing further service as an officeholder is a conjunctional clause preceded by removal from office. This entire procedure is a legal nullity and Democrat show trial – or, in more course vernacular, a shit show.]

And here, the House approved an article of impeachment that concerns not solely the President’s incitement but also his conduct preceding and following his provocation of an armed assault on the Capitol.

This is speculation, supposition, and assumes facts about the President's actions, not in evidence. That is if the Democrats actually recognize the difference between facts and narrative.]  

Regardless, even if the First Amendment were applicable here, private citizens and government officials stand on very different footing when it comes to being held responsible for their statements. As the leader of the Nation, the President occupies a position of unique power.

And the Supreme Court has made clear that the First Amendment does not shield public officials who occupy sensitive policymaking positions from adverse actions when their speech undermines important government interests.

[OCS: Except for the Congressional “speech and debate” protections of Congress where you can lie with impunity and commit crimes that would see ordinary citizens prosecuted and imprisoned.] 

Thus, just as a President may legitimately demand the resignation of a Cabinet Secretary who publicly disagrees with him on a matter of policy (which President Trump did repeatedly), the public’s elected representatives may disqualify the President from federal office when they recognize that his public statements constitute a violation of his oath of office and a high crime against the constitutional order.

[OCS: The Democrats seem to confuse and conflate issues akin to throwing crap against a wall and seeing what sticks. The President is not a cabinet official that serves at the pleasure of Congress. The Congress does not have the power to fire the President only to impeach and convict him if he has committed treason, bribery, or high crimes and misdemeanors.]

No one would seriously suggest that a President should be immunized from impeachment if he publicly championed the adoption of totalitarian government, swore an oath of eternal loyalty to a foreign power, or advocated that states secede from and overthrow the Union—even though private citizens could be protected by the First Amendment for such speech.  By its own terms, and in light of its fundamentally democratic purposes, the First Amendment does not constrain Congress from removing an official whose expression makes him unfit to hold or ever again occupy federal office.

[OCS: The First Amendment protects the advocacy of secession or even abolishing the First Amendment itself. Read the exceptions in the Brandenburg Principle. (Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 US 444 (1969), to determine when inflammatory speech intending to advocate illegal action can be restricted.)

Under the Constitution’s impeachment provision, unfitness for office, except under the 25th Amendment, which is not applicable, is not a criterion for impeachment.]

Yet even if President Trump’s acts while occupying our highest office were treated like the acts of a private citizen, and even if the First Amendment somehow limited Congress’s power to respond to presidential abuses, a First Amendment defense would still fail. Speech is not protected where it is “directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.”

Given the tense, angry, and armed mob before him, President Trump’s speech—in which he stated “you’ll never take back our country with weakness,” proclaimed that “[y]ou have to show strength,” and exhorted his supporters to “go to the Capitol” and “fight like
Hell” immediately before they stormed the Capitol—plainly satisfies that standard.

[OCS: From various investigations and timelines, planning was initiated days before the speech, and the Capitol complex was breached significantly before the speech ended.]

Separate from these legal points, President Trump may assert that this impeachment reflects “cancel culture” or some supposed intolerance of his right to voice objections to the election results. That would be a red herring.

President Trump endangered the very constitutional system that protects all other rights, including freedom of expression. It would be perverse to suggest that our shared commitment to free speech requires the Senate to ignore the obvious: that President Trump is singularly responsible for the violence and destruction that unfolded in our seat of government on January 6. “It can’t be that the solemn price for protecting our civil liberties against current and future abuses is that the president can incite a mob bearing huge flags with his name on them to storm the Capitol, kill a police officer, and further, not immediately tell them to stop or, as commander-in-chief, to refuse to send help . . . . [T]hat would be a sure way to make a mockery of the civil liberties . . . contemplated and secured by the Constitution and Bill of Rights.” 

[Bullpucky!]

<Source>

Attempting to humiliate the former President or assign guilt based on a refusal to appear is totally disingenuous…

Jamie_Raskin

Impeachment Managers Demand Trump Testify at Senate Trial

House impeachment managers have requested that former President Trump testify at his upcoming Senate impeachment trial.

Impeachment manager Jamie Raskin (D., Md.) sent a letter to Trump’s legal team requesting the testimony. Raskin argued that the testimony was needed because Trump denied allegations set forth in the article of impeachment, which accuses the former president of “incitement of insurrection.”

“Two days ago, you filed an Answer in which you denied many factual allegations set forth in the article of impeachment,” Raskin wrote. “You have thus attempted to put critical facts at issue notwithstanding the clear and overwhelming evidence of your constitutional offense. In light of your disputing these factual allegations, I write to invite you to provide testimony under oath, either before or during the Senate impeachment trial, concerning your conduct on January 6, 2021.”

“If you decline the invitation, we reserve any and all rights, including the right to establish at trial that your refusal to testify supports a strong adverse inference regarding your actions (and inaction) on​ ​January 6, 2021.” Raskin continued. <Source>

Presidential response – pound sand (politely)…

tt

Bottom line…

This Democrat brief is five pounds of shit crammed into a bag that holds only four pounds, That the House Democrats are asking the Senate to ignore the First Amendment is yet another example of why the Democrats present a clear and present danger to America, our Constitution, our First and Second Amendment rights, and ALL American citizens.

We are so screwed.

-- steve


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS



WHAT DID YOU SAY?

As each day passes, we see the radical progressive socialist democrats twist and pervert America’s Constitution and cultural sensibilities. Mostly by adopting a form of Orwellian “newspeak” where up is down, right is left, good is evil, and words mean only what you want them to mean when used with political intent by an authoritarian state.

The parasitical symbiosis arising between the so-called wealthy elites, the credentialed academics, the government, their captive media, and controlled platforms.

It is insidiously creeping through America, promoting identity politics designed to divide and destroy America and Americans in order to bring about a revolution that can destroy existing society and individuals can be “perfected” and live in a society beneficial for all.

A society of “equality” and “equity.”  Much like the French national motto of "Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité," which translates to "liberty, equality, fraternity.” The motto that appeared during the French Revolution also known as the “Reign of Terror” revolution. A revolution that saw approximately 40,000 individuals slaughtered in  “a series of massacres and numerous public executions that took place in response to revolutionary fervor, anti-church sentiment, and accusations of treason by the Committee of Public Safety."

Here is how it works…

Except for a few twisted individuals, there are relatively few radical racists who believe in the superiority of one race over another that manifest in violent actions against members of that race.

A few caveats: one, it is human nature and part of our survival instinct to like those who look like us or who have similar behaviors and values; two, racism is mostly a learned response from one’s upbringing, education, and environment--children of different races play with each other as children, not as members of a racial, ethnic, or another identity group; and three, racial animosity can be driven by traumatic experiences with members of that race. Then there are those perceptions driven by experience, probability, and stories reported endlessly in the mainstream media.

However, the progressive socialist democrats use race as a political weapon. They start with a black and white (no pun intended) proposition that redefines individuals into only two categories” you are either a racist or an anti-racist. If you agree with the progressive socialist democrats, all is well, all is quiet, and you carry on with your life as you wish. However, the minute you oppose the politics of the progressives, you can be labeled a racist, and anything you say, therefore, is racist, and by definition, “hate speech.”

And using the label of “hater,” “-phobe,” or simply one who uses “hate speech” is a raison d'être to be investigated and sanctioned. In many cases, sanctioned by agents acting in unofficial concert with the government based on their ideological preferences, commercial advantages, or naked fear of the consequences of being labeled a racist.

De-platformed for “hate speech and other ideological crimes.”

parler

Which should serve as a warning about the use of controlled platforms...

TRUST-WORK

Bottom line…

Until Barack Obama and his cadre of fellow travelers, race relations were in positive territory where progress was being made, although we had a way to go. Now the progressive socialist democrats have institutionalized racism and are stoking the flames of division within America. If you say “all lives matter,” you are labeled a racist who believes that black lives don’t matter. Even understanding the slogan is built on proven lies by a violent radical communist front group.

It appears our Constitution is under attack, especially the First and Second Amendments.

It is time to push back using original word definitions and labeling those who tell you different, ideologues and provocateurs.

We are so screwed.

-- steve


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS



ADAM "PIECE OF" SHIFF ANGLING TO BECOME CALIFORNIA'S ATTORNEY GENERAL

The only thing that is scarier than a corrupt liar like Adam “Piece of” Schiff becoming California’s Attorney General would be Barack Obama being nominated to the Supreme Court…

ADAM SCHIFF

Only progressive socialist democrats could even think of appointing Schiff as California's Attorney General, the man who openly colluded with dissident members of the National Security Council to use a dishonest secret witness (Eric Ciaramella) in secret basement proceedings to mount a concerted impeachment coup against a sitting President. Not only were the impeachment grounds fallacious, but Schiff attempted to introduce false evidence into the Congressional Record. Schiff likely knew about Hunter Biden’s corrupt activities in Ukraine and recorded evidence that now-President Joe Biden was involved in criminal activities to keep his son from being investigated by Ukrainian authorities.

Moreover, as the Chair of the House Intelligence Committee, Schiff did nothing to remove Representative Eric Swalwell after his affair with a Chinese spy was discovered and reported to the Committee.

Schiff has his eyes on being California’s AG and Pelosi’s on board with it

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) wants to be named California’s next attorney general — and he has House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s blessing, according to four Democratic sources familiar with the matter.

Schiff, a Harvard Law School graduate and former prosecutor who currently serves as the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, has lobbied California Gov. Gavin Newsom to appoint him to the role, those individuals said. News of Schiff’s interest was first reported by Axios.

The current California attorney general, Xavier Becerra, was nominated by President Joe Biden to serve as Health and Human Services Secretary and will be vacating the post if, as expected, he is confirmed by the Senate. <Source>

Even worse than Schiff’s behavior in the House of Representatives may his behavior in the House of Ed Buck in the gay mecca of West Hollywood…

Rumors continue to swirl around Schiff for his many (16?) visits to Ed Buck’s homosexual drug den. Buck is now awaiting trial on at least 9 charges after another black man died of a drug overdose on Buck’s premises. Is this another Epstein deal with Schiff as a target or willing participant? This must be investigated. Buck was a major supporter of the Democrat Party, Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, and Ted Lieu, among others.

All the California politicians who took money from Ed Buck

Ed Buck was arrested last month and charged in connection with two overdose deaths at his West Hollywood home. There, prosecutors allege, he manipulated gay black men who were homeless, addicted or working as escorts into doing drugs for his pleasure.

Buck has pleaded not guilty to the federal charges.

Since the mid 2000s, Buck has given more than $500,000 to political candidates and causes, almost all of them linked to the Democratic Party. Forty politicians now holding office in California, ranging from Los Angeles City Hall to Congress, have cashed a check from Buck.

Current officeholders have received more than $150,000 from Buck, including Gov. Gavin Newsom, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, Los Angeles County District Attorney Jackie Lacey and U.S. Reps. Ted Lieu and Adam B. Schiff. Some have returned the money.

Bottom line…

There is no way Californians can trust Adam “Piece of” Schiff to uphold the U.S. Constitution, the California State Constitution, and what remains of the laws in a lawless state. There is no way Schiff can take the oath of office and immediately condone the knowing and deliberate violations of federal immigration law regarding California’s “sanctuary” status. But he will – and he will not be impeached or tried for aiding and abetting a criminal act.

Another reason to recall California Governor Gavin “Newsolini” Newsom.

We are so screwed.

-- steve


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS



WHO KILLED ASHLI BABBITT?

PELOSI-GREEN

There is something unusual happening in connection with a “use of deadly force” incident at the Capitol...

Ashli Babbitt, a 35-year-old California native, and several other protesters, including an agent provocateur associated with Antifa and Black Lives Matter, appear to be breaking into the Speaker’s Lobby, a hallway leading to the House of Representatives chamber, where an unnamed individual shot her.

Usually, the individual shooter or at least their agency is disclosed after a significant shooting, especially after the individual was apparently cleared of wrongdoing.

Officer Who Shot Capitol Rioter Ashli Babbitt Shouldn’t Be Charged, Investigators Advise

Investigators have made a preliminary determination that the police officer who shot and killed Ashli Babbitt during the U.S. Capitol riot shouldn’t be charged with any crimes in connection with her death, according to people familiar with the review.

The officer who shot her had been placed on leave soon after the riot while Ms. Babbitt’s death was being investigated, including on the question of whether it was a violation of her civil rights.

The Justice Department said in announcing the investigation that it was following routine procedure for whenever a police officer uses deadly force by having the Washington Metropolitan Police Department examine the shooting. The police investigators have made an initial determination that charges against the officer aren’t warranted, the people said, adding that Justice Department officials haven’t yet made a final determination on the matter. <Source>

Is this a cover-up?

Question one: What were the rules of engagement, who authored them, were they modified under the circumstance, and who modified them?

Question two: It appears to some observers that the officer who took the shot appears to be wearing cuff links, which is highly unusual even for plainclothes officers.

shooter

Question three: There are rampant rumors that the officer was not a member of the Capitol Police or the Metropolitan Police Department – but may have been “a member of the personal protection detail for congressional leadership. Was this one of Pelosi’s bodyguards?”

Question four: Why is this issue being ignored by a media obsessed with anything Trump? There does not seem to be any reporting from investigative reporters, leaks from publicity-seeking insiders, or activists screaming about transparency and the public’s right to know?

Bottom line…

It happened in Nancy Pelosi’s House of Representatives. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was present, and it was her office that the vandals targeted. And Nancy Pelosi and her cadre of fellow travelers are among the most strident voices when a police officer shoots an individual, even one who is a criminal. So why the news blackout?

We are so screwed.

-- steve


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS



THE TRUMP DRAMA CONTINUES TO CONSUME THE MEDIA

TRUST-AMERICA

With all of the stories about former President Trump and his various attorneys in the mainstream media, there are several issues to be considered…

Can you believe what you read in the mainstream media today, given the significant errors and omissions of their reporting? Including, but not limited to, numerous reports from anonymous sources that turned out to be outright fabrications by individuals who did not have access to the underlying source of their allegations, numerous stories regarding a non-existent collusion hoax that were never retracted or footnoted. and the deliberate withholding of negative information about a presidential candidate and his family that would have impacted the presidential election. Thus it is possible that such media failures enabled a candidate, compromised by a hostile foreign state, to become the President of the United States. And, ramped-up the fervor of those seeking redress from their government. 

Can you believe allegations put forth by the majority Democrats of the House of Representatives given their dishonest and duplicitous behavior in the past and their willingness to subvert House rules and procedures for ill intent?

Consider the allegations contained in the articles of impeachment.

hr24-hdr

This resolution impeaches President Donald John Trump for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Specifically, the resolution sets forth an article of impeachment stating that President Trump incited an insurrection against the government of the United States.

The article states that

  • prior to the joint session of Congress held on January 6, 2021, to count the votes of the electoral college, President Trump repeatedly issued false statements asserting that the presidential election results were fraudulent and should not be accepted by the American people or certified by state or federal officials;
  • shortly before the joint session commenced, President Trump reiterated false claims to a crowd near the White House and willfully made statements to the crowd that encouraged and foreseeably resulted in lawless action at the Capitol;
  • members of the crowd, incited by President Trump, unlawfully breached and vandalized the Capitol and engaged in other violent, destructive, and seditious acts, including the killing of a law enforcement officer;
  • President Trump's conduct on January 6, 2021, followed his prior efforts to subvert and obstruct the certification of the presidential election, which included a threatening phone call to the Secretary of State of Georgia on January 2, 2021;
  • President Trump gravely endangered the security of the United States and its institutions of government, threatened the integrity of the democratic system, interfered with the peaceful transition of power, and imperiled a coequal branch of government; and
  • by such conduct, President Trump warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office, and disqualification to hold U.S. office.

<Source>

We have heard from various sources in the mainstream media and social media platforms that a number of the attorneys who would represent the President in the impeachment hearing have either resigned or have been asked to leave. It has been alleged that the primary issue is former President Trump’s insistence that the attorneys argue that the election was stolen and the statements made by the President at that time were correct.

Trump’s legal team exited after he insisted impeachment defense focus on false claims of election fraud

South Carolina lawyer Karl S. “Butch” Bowers Jr. and four other attorneys who recently signed on to represent the former president abruptly parted ways with him this weekend, days before his Feb. 9 Senate trial for his role in inciting the attack on the U.S. Capitol. On Sunday evening, Trump’s office announced two new lawyers were taking over his defense.

Two people familiar with the discussions preceding the departure of the original legal team said that Trump wanted them to make the case during the trial that he actually won the election. To do so would require citing his false claims of election fraud — even as his allies and attorneys have said that he should instead focus on arguing that impeaching a president who has already left office is unconstitutional. <Source>

Why not do both?

Argue that the impeachment is unconstitutional. That is former President Trump cannot be impeached because Donald Trump has left office and is a private citizen, pointing out that the Senate does not have extra-judicial powers to try a private citizen -- but even if it were constitutionally permitted, former President Trump committed no impeachable offense as he was; one, exercising his right to free speech; two,  the House cannot with any degree of certainty prove that the election was without serious legal and procedural flaws involving a totality of votes greatly exceeding the margin between the top two candidates; and three, prove that Trump’s words were so incendiary as to produce an immediate attack on the Capitol complex. 

I believe at the House impeachment managers cannot prove, with any degree of certainty, that President Trump’s assertions are false any more than President Trump can prove them to be true without a lengthy period of discovery. Especially because the House acted precipitously, did not have witnesses, and did not provide the President a legitimate opportunity to rebut the allegations.

As for inciting, there is credible evidence that certain elements may have been concluding, without the President’s knowledge, permission, or urging, to enter the Capitol complex forcibly. By reviewing the timeline of events, it might be shown that the actions ascribed to President Trump occurred before his speech ended. A speech which included a suggestion -- “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.’

Bottom line…

It is unlikely that former President Trump will be convicted in the Senate. However, it will put the vitriol of a malignant Democrat Party on full display for all to see. It is also likely that Trump will continue to be Trump. The Democrats will continue to be evildoers. The GOP will continue to be feckless cowards.

And, We the People” will continue to be screwed by a rigged system.

-- steve


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS



DEMOCRATS AND DEMONS: A WARNING TO AMERICA

I will tell you upfront that this is a disturbing video, not because it chronicles the decline of Seattle, Washington at the hands of progressive socialist democrats and their radically progressive ways, but because this same story is being repeated in our major cities from San Francisco to New York.

It is almost as if the progressive socialist democrats governing these areas follow the revolutionary Cloward-Piven Strategy of creating a crisis in the current social systems to overwhelm the systems and ultimately bring about their collapse. Resulting in the demonic demise of our American way of life under capitalism in order to bring about mythical perfected individuals operating under a communist system of “equity and equality.”

The rise of the radical left is a clear and present danger to America. And, it is going to get worse unless the good citizens, you and me, push back against the progressive socialist democrats, their captive mainstream media, and their control over those who control the social media platforms. 

My best friend who lives in Washington sent me an email with this link and a warning…

A terrible indictment of what is going on in Seattle. For your own safety, don’t go there.

I just received this earlier today, and after watching the whole thing,

I debated whether or not to send it on, as it certainly isn't a Christmas story...   But then I decided, maybe tough stories, ones that make you think, are the best gifts of all... 

One doesn't often get to view a journalist piece such as this...  So here you go...  Be prepared, it's very long (1 hr., 30 min)...

https://youtu.be/WijoL3Hy_Bw

If the video is missing, it can be found on YouTube

This video is age-restricted and only available on YouTube.

station-social-komo-tv

The Fight for the Soul of Seattle | A KOMO News Documentary

“The Fight for the Soul of Seattle” examines the role of Seattle’s City Council in allowing the situation to reach what many experts consider epidemic levels under the guise of a compassionate approach to people who suffer from substance addiction and who commit crimes to feed their habit.

It documents the heartbreaking condition of people on the streets and the crushing decisions Seattle entrepreneurs are forced to contemplate as their life savings and dreams are destroyed by theft, vandalism, and a dwindling customer base.

This documentary also explores potential bold solutions to treat those living on the streets and pair them with agencies and assistance that can provide a clear path away from the endless circle of addiction and crime. <Source>

'Fight for the Soul of Seattle': Program looks at effects of city's permissive posture.

seatlle

If you manage to watch the entire video, you can see parallels between all of the major cities being attacked by the communist front groups like Black Lives Matter and Antifa. You can see the very same permissive policies destroying San Francisco, Los Angeles, Baltimore, Detroit, Chicago, and New York, to name a few.

Whereas city fathers and civic-minded individuals of the greatest generation would have fought back against this nonsense, it appears that the corrupt politicians and those who profit from corruption, including the public employee unions, have reached a critical mass, getting so wealthy as to self-perpetuate a manifestly corrupt and evil system. All with the tacit permission of apathetic Americans. And now the democrats are importing individuals who are used to this garbage in their native country and who will be too afraid of losing a chance at a promised citizenship to push back.

Bottom line…

The fact that people will put individuals like Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Gavin Newsom, Bill Di Blasio, Joe Biden, and others in high office is not only a systemic problem but the proximate cause of our anguish and troubles. The truth is that the Republicans are not always the solution to our problems, but you can rely on progressive socialist democrats always create or worsen problems.

In the democrat party, we are facing a clear and present danger to America. To say we are screwed without divine intervention is an understatement.

-- steve


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS



HOW TO SURVIVE THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION

There is little or no doubt in my mind that our Constitution, our Republic, and our American way of life is in jeopardy.

And there is only but one way to survive.

With the love and loyalty of a puppy…

puppy

And the assurance of safety with your favorite self-protection device…

45

Bottom line…

Tough times demand protecting yourself, your family, and your neighbor.

-- steve


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS



POLITICAL UGLINESS IN THE CAPITOL

“We Mutually Pledge To Each Other Our Lives, Our Fortunes, And Our Sacred Honor…”

With this last sentence of our Declaration of Independence, the fifty-six signers of this foundational document not only committed themselves to uncompromising and complete devotion to the American Republic, but they also charted a path for all patriots to come. They faced being tried and executed for treason. Still, they did not employ private security guards or surround themselves with fencing to protect against the public – at least one-third of which were Loyalists that supported King George and the Monarchy.

It now appears that the majority of “our representatives” no longer represent their constituency of American citizens but have gone rogue in favor of an un-American agenda that is slowly crippling the United States Constitution, our American values, and our economy. In essence, destroying the America, we know and love.

SAFE-SPACE

There is but one way out – and that is to start by ensuring the integrity of our elections and to curtail one-sided rules that convey an unfair advantage to a single political party or an incumbent politician. Our government officials must prove to us that our elections are honest, auditable, and represent the will of legitimate voters. Legitimate investigators should have access to all procedural statements, checklists, logs, electronic media, ballots, and voting devices. Each poll-watcher should be required to file a report of their observations – to be sworn, sealed, and opened by a bi-partisan commission after the election. – more to come.

Bottom line…

We are so screwed.

-- steve


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS