An Historical Juncture Demanding Human Action

(Delivered at the Libertarian Party Mises Caucus Take Human Action Bash, May 15, 2021)

By Michael Rectenwald

The most pressing matter facing advocates of liberty today is the prospect of the political and economic establishment completing the institution of a totalitarian state. There is no other way to read the multipronged approach and the political maneuverings that political operatives are taking to rule under “Biden.” I put “Biden” in quotation marks here because the current president of the United States is not a singular person named Joe Biden. It is a politburo consisting of party rulers and advisers, ruling by executive fiat, plus, as I’ll discuss, corporate-state apparatuses. Make no mistake, the power grab that is underway poses the most grievous threat to liberty in recent history. 

The signals could not be any clearer. In addition to the swath of executive orders, clearly composed by politburo members and aimed at extending federal power, the political establishment has initiated a growing body of laws which would, if passed, consolidate uniparty rule for the foreseeable future.

These include especially H.R. 1, or the For the People’s Act, passed by the House. Should it pass the Senate (with the eradication of the filibuster, which of itself would mean uniparty rule), H.R.-1 would grossly favor Democratic candidates in federal elections. Most importantly, it would further centralize federal election oversight and, according to the Institute for Free Speech, “[e]xpand the universe of regulated online political speech (by Americans) beyond paid advertising to include, apparently, communications on groups’ or individuals’ own websites and e-mail messages.” And Biden just revoked an Executive Order preventing online censorship. If you think that libertarians won’t be affected, think again, as libertarians have been mentioned as among those dangerous political elements to be targeted for their dangerous speech.

The legislative maneuverings include the ‘‘Judiciary Act of 2021,’’ which would simply expand the Supreme Court to twelve members plus the chief justice. This move would essentially effect a legislative takeover of the Supreme Court, as the Supreme Court would increasingly “legislate from the bench” and likewise expand the power of the legislative and executive branches beyond official perimeters. The odds of its passage, as is, are slim, but the overture is indicative of an attempted power grab not seen since FDR.

But the most imperiling sign of the nearing consolidation of totalitarian government is the effective merger of corporate and state functionaries, with corporations and other organizations acting as political appendages of the government and enforcing corporate-state desiderata. The indications of this merger are so many and sundry that any exhaustive recounting of them would entail a book-length treatment—a book-length treatment that I may endeavor to write.

The most conspicuous example of a corporate-state merger is the extension of governmental power to corporations and other organizations with the covid crisis response measures, which may now exceed lockdowns and masking to include the issuance of vaccine passports that corporations and other organizations may require. (The prospects for vaccine passports actually may have been increased by the announcement of the new “rule” issued by Biden after the CDC’s advice that mask mandates be lifted for those who’ve taken the “vaccine.” Already the covid authoritarians are suggesting that without vaccine passports, there will be no way to tell who should and who need not wear a mask. Although the vaccinated will be “allowed” to go without masks, many have indicated that they will continue to wear them so as not to lose the opportunity of signaling their virtue, their compliance, and their authoritarian druthers, while marking the unmasked as deviationists.)

The old saw that such corporations are private companies and that libertarians must support their right to do whatever they want does not hold water, because clearly these corporate bodies have been enrolled as state apparatuses. Operation Warp Speed was rolled out by the federal government under Trump and has enlisted private organizations—first and foremost Big Pharma—to execute it. The state has enabled Big Pharma to profit enormously by instituting a state-of-emergency regime which in the US makes non-FDA-approved vaccines legal. At the same time, Big Pharma—along with the WHO, the CDC, and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases—legitimizes the state-of-emergency regime, which in turn augments state power.

The enrollment of corporations and other organizations in the scheme to vaccinate the population and to require such vaccinations for social participation should not be considered in terms of the prerogatives of private organizations but as part of the infiltration of the state into private industry, and vice versa. What we are witnessing, and should be resisting, is a merger into a corporate-government state complex, wherein government can bypass the legislative branch and enforce unpopular mandates by colluding with corporations and other organizations to make “policy.” The state exceeds the reaches of the government per se. It includes these corporate apparatuses. Furthermore, those who deploy masks and enforce their use may be considered state agents in their own right. Like major corporations, these individuals have been effectively deputized by the state to enforce state sanctions.

Perhaps the most egregious element of this corporate-state stranglehold on the population is the participation of what I call Big Digital, the major media and social media platforms, along with the primary information control and search organization, Google. I have called this set of digital giants the Google Archipelago. Big Digital conglomerates eliminate media outlets and voices that challenge official narratives and disappear dissidents. The official narratives include the covid narrative about lockdowns, masking, and vaccinations, although the official narrative has not only changed willy-nilly but also has been proven factually wrong, as well as socially devastating to the vast majority. Big Digital and the media serve the state in general and in particular Big Pharma, by eliminating oppositional views regarding the lockdowns, masks, and vaccines, and by pushing fear-inducing propaganda about the virus and its ever-proliferating variants.

As I have written in Google Archipelago, Big Digital must be considered an agent of an authoritarian state—as a “governmentality” or state apparatus functioning on behalf and as part of the state itself. “Governmentality” is a term that should become well known in the coming weeks and months. Michel Foucault introduced the term “governmentality” to refer to the distribution of state power to the population, or the transmission of governance to the governed. Foucault referred to the means by which the populace comes to govern itself as it adopts and personalizes the imperatives of the state, or how the governed adopt the mentality desired by the government—govern-mentality. One might point to masking and social distancing as instances of what Foucault meant by his notion of governmentality. I adopted the term governmentality and have emended it to refer to corporations and other officially non-governmental actors who actively undertake state functions, including the individual on the street. 

As Jeff Deist has suggested to me by email, Big Digital Tech companies “demonstrate the idea of ‘nothing outside the state,’ which means nothing is truly private…. To me,” writes Jeff, “the ‘civil’ in civil society means wholly private—the part of society which is totally outside and apart from the state. That’s what we need to expand. Our civil rights precede the state, and thus lie outside its political control. The state’s only (dubious) justification is to help secure those rights. So, is Google part of civil society? Absolutely not.” As political agents, Big Digital corporations are state agents.

Similarly, other major corporations now perform state-sanctioned roles by echoing and enforcing state-approved ideologies, policies, and politics: indoctrinating employees with Critical Race Theory, issuing woke advertisements, policing the opinions of workers, firing dissidents, and soon, possibly demanding vaccine passports from employees and customers.

The overall tendency, then, has been toward the corporate-state monopolization over all aspects of life, with increasing control by approved principals over information and opinion, economic production, and the political sphere. If the consolidation accelerates, the broad state, which includes the corporate appendages, will require the elimination of noncompliant, disaffected, and “untrustworthy” economic and political actors, using, in part environmental, social, and governance scores to direct resources to approved producers and distributors. And, with the elimination of political opposition, the tendency is toward uniparty rule, and with it, the merging of party and state into a singular organ. 

Some refer to this configuration as fascism, and on the economic level it is fascism, at least at the top. But it is coupled by Marxian socialist rhetoric and ideology on the ground, replete with totalitarian social control vis-à-vis high-tech surveillance under the pretense of medical necessity. I call it corporate socialism, with a corporate-state ruling elite tending toward monopoly on top, and “actually existing socialism” for everyone else. (Actually existing socialism is a pejorative term used mostly by dissidents in socialist countries to refer to what life was really like under socialism, rather than in the perfidious books of Marx and his epigones.) Corporate socialism is not merely government bailouts for corporations. It is a two-tiered system of ‘actually-existing socialism’ on the ground, paralleled by a set of corporate monopolies on top.

If you’re at all familiar with the corporate and billionaire funding sources behind Black Lives Matter and Antifa and the socialist commitments of these groups and their leaders, you’ve probably wondered why the “capitalist class” would support a movement whose doctrine is apparently antithetical to their own interests. Aren’t these funders capitalists after all, and don’t capitalists naturally oppose socialism? The answer is that monopolists are more than happy to spread socialist ideology amongst the masses, because in doing so, they prepare the population for this corporate socialist regime. They thereby help to eliminate competition and likewise consolidate their monopolistic grip on the economy. 

Even some leftists have come to the same conclusion as I have about the current configuration. The Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben has acknowledged this pernicious new amalgamation of corporatism and socialism, calling it by the name of “communist capitalism.” Agamben writes (and take his use of the word “capitalism” with the necessary grain of salt, because what he is often referring to is corporatism and not free market economics):

The capitalism that is consolidating on a planetary scale is not capitalism in the form it took in the West: it is, rather, capitalism in its communist variant, which combined an extremely rapid development of production with a totalitarian political regime. This is the historical significance of the leading role that China is assuming not only in the economy in the strict sense, but also, as the political use of the pandemic has eloquently shown, as a paradigm of human governance. That the regimes established in the self-styled communist countries were a particular form of capitalism, especially suited to economically backward countries and therefore classified as state capitalism, was perfectly known to those who can read history; It was quite unexpected that this form of capitalism, which seemed to have exhausted its task and therefore obsolete, was destined to become, in a technologically updated configuration, the dominant principle in the current phase of globalized capitalism. It is possible, in fact, that we are today witnessing a conflict between Western capitalism, which coexisted with the rule of law and bourgeois democracies, and the new communist capitalism, from which the latter seems to emerge victorious. What is certain, however, is that the new regime will unite in itself the most inhuman aspect of capitalism with the most atrocious one of statist communism, combining the extreme alienation of relations between men with unprecedented social control.

Nevertheless, and lest I be the bearer of only bad news, we are beginning to see chinks in the armor of woke-covid, corporate socialist totalitarianism. For example, even the New York Times has reported an actual covid fact—there has not been a single recorded case of outdoor covid transmission. Furthermore, numerous retailers are now lifting their mask mandates. Despite the attempts of the Branch Covidians to seize on the opportunity for the use of vaccine passports, the elements of tyranny are beginning to crumble. Just days ago, even the CDC acknowledged a Salk Institute study that shows that the spike protein, the very protein that the “vaccine” prompts the cells to produce, poses a danger to the epithelium of the vascular system. Other such studies will soon see the light of day. Mainstream propaganda outlets will also be forced to acknowledge the utter uselessness of mask mandates and lockdowns, facts which have been so adeptly and relentlessly demonstrated by Tom Woods. This is not to mention the social and economic devastation that these draconian measures have precipitated. Meanwhile, broader swaths of the population are becoming aware and wary of this regime, as worldwide protests of the lockdowns proliferate. 

As Michael Heise has suggested, this attempted and floundering totalitarianism represents an important opportunity for the Libertarian Party, and in particular for the Mises Caucus. As the standard bearers of liberty, the Mises contingent represents a beacon for real resistance. Its very existence and recent growth mean that the totalitarian state is incomplete. 

The Mises Caucus has a rare opportunity at this historical juncture, thanks to the political establishment’s declaration of war against liberty, reasoned debate, and economic literacy. How can we exploit this opportunity?

·     By consistently standing against covid tyranny, the Mises Caucus can show that there is a principled opposition to lockdowns, masks, and forced vaccinations.

·     By offering a principled stance against the collectivist ideologies that infringe individual rights and self-determination, the Mises Caucus can attract those disaffected by the hegemonic ideological environment in which we find ourselves. This involves treating people first and always as individuals, not as members of weaponized identity classes used to achieve political ends, and showing why such individualism is far superior, including for minorities.

·     By consistently opposing the endless wars and advocating the non-aggression principle, both politically and personally, we show that the free market can and must be decoupled from imperialism, a decoupling that the Left believes to be impossible. 

·     By consistently opposing the imprisonment of those charged with victimless crimes, the Mises Caucus proves that it cares for individuals, including those in the worst circumstances.

·     By defending property rights, beginning with the property in one’s person, the Mises Caucus demonstrates that property rights are required for individual liberty. 

·     By representing economic sanity and clearly demonstrating that private property and free exchange are the basis for true economic flourishing, the Mises Caucus debunks the belief that socialism is best for achieving social welfare.

·     By consistently opposing statist corporatism and corporate bailouts, the Mises Caucus shows that it favors free markets and not rigged marketing and political entrepreneurship.

·     By standing for individual rights and individual liberty under all circumstances, the Mises Caucus can lead the way out of the tyranny that besets us.

As a native Pittsburgher, I am proud to share a birthplace with the great Ron Paul. I am a proud Ron Paul-Lew Rockwell libertarian. But this was not always the case. Those who know something of my biography, either from my memoir Springtime for Snowflakes, or from my appearances on the Tom Woods Show, know that I am a former Marxist. I came to libertarianism, first as a civil libertarian and then as an Austrian School economic libertarian, after I saw the totalitarian character of the contemporary social justice movement and subsequently of socialism. I soon read Mises and relished his demolition of Marxism. 

I’m here to say that if someone like me can be converted to libertarianism, then the opportunities for attracting defectors from all across the political spectrum, including soon-to-be former socialists, are endless. I anticipate that more defectors will be joining our ranks as the totalitarianism unfolds and unravels. I urge you to be on the lookout for them and to welcome them into our community. Thank you.

32 thoughts on “An Historical Juncture Demanding Human Action

  1. Yes Jimmy Dore is on spot, the warmonger neocons that perpetrated 9/11 and blamed it on al Qaeda in order to establish the US constabulatory as per the PNAC document’s “New Pearl Harbor”

    John Pilger reveals the American plan: a new Pearl Harbour

    Two years ago a project set up by the men who now surround George W Bush said what America needed was a “catastrophic and catalysing event”.

    The threat posed by US terrorism to the security of nations and individuals was outlined in prophetic detail in a document written more than two years ago and disclosed only recently. What was needed for America to dominate much of humanity and the world’s resources, it said, was “some catastrophic and catalysing event – like a new Pearl Harbor”.

    The attacks of 11 September 2001 provided the “new Pearl Harbor”, described as “the opportunity of ages”. The extremists who have since exploited 11 September come from the era of Ronald Reagan, when far-right groups and “think-tanks” were established to avenge the American “defeat” in Vietnam. In the 1990s, there was an added agenda: to justify the denial of a “peace dividend” following the cold war. The Project for the New American Century was formed, along with the American Enterprise Institute, the Hudson Institute and others that have since merged the ambitions of the Reagan administration with those of the current Bush regime.

    One of George W Bush’s “thinkers” is Richard Perle. I interviewed Perle when he was advising Reagan; and when he spoke about “total war”, I mistakenly dismissed him as mad. He recently used the term again in describing America’s “war on terror”. “No stages,” he said. “This is total war. We are fighting a variety of enemies. There are lots of them out there. All this talk about first we are going to do Afghanistan, then we will do Iraq . . . this is entirely the wrong way to go about it. If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely and we don’t try to piece together clever diplomacy, but just wage a total war . . . our children will sing great songs about us years from now.”

    Perle is one of the founders of the Project for the New American Century, the PNAC. Other founders include Dick Cheney, now vice-president, Donald Rumsfeld, defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz, deputy defence secretary, I Lewis Libby, Cheney’s chief of staff, William J Bennett, Reagan’s education secretary, and Zalmay Khalilzad, Bush’s ambassador to Afghanistan. These are the modern chartists of American terrorism.

    The PNAC’s seminal report, Rebuilding America’s Defences: strategy, forces and resources for a new century, was a blueprint of American aims in all but name. Two years ago it recommended an increase in arms-spending by $48bn so that Washington could “fight and win multiple, simultaneous major theatre wars”. This has happened. It said the United States should develop “bunker-buster” nuclear weapons and make “star wars” a national priority. This is happening. It said that, in the event of Bush taking power, Iraq should be a target. And so it is.

    As for Iraq’s alleged “weapons of mass destruction”, these were dismissed, in so many words, as a convenient excuse, which it is. “While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification,” it says, “the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.”

    How has this grand strategy been implemented? A series of articles in the Washington Post, co-authored by Bob Woodward of Watergate fame and based on long interviews with senior members of the Bush administration, reveals how 11 September was manipulated.

    On the morning of 12 September 2001, without any evidence of who the hijackers were, Rumsfeld demanded that the US attack Iraq. According to Woodward, Rumsfeld told a cabinet meeting that Iraq should be “a principal target of the first round in the war against terrorism”. Iraq was temporarily spared only because Colin Powell, the secretary of state, persuaded Bush that “public opinion has to be prepared before a move against Iraq is possible”. Afghanistan was chosen as the softer option. If Jonathan Steele’s estimate in the Guardian is correct, some 20,000 people in Afghanistan paid the price of this debate with their lives.

    Time and again, 11 September is described as an “opportunity”. In last April’s New Yorker, the investigative reporter Nicholas Lemann wrote that Bush’s most senior adviser, Condoleezza Rice, told him she had called together senior members of the National Security Council and asked them “to think about ‘how do you capitalise on these opportunities'”, which she compared with those of “1945 to 1947”: the start of the cold war.

    https://www.newstatesman.com/node/192545

    Also see:
    https://hybridrogue1.wordpress.com/2015/09/18/911-false-flag-psyop/

    Like

    1. Former DEA agent Derek Maltz issues a dire warning as record amounts of fentanyl are seized at the southern border. #FoxNews

      Subscribe to Fox News! https://bit.ly/2vBUvAS
      Watch more Fox News Video: http://video.foxnews.com
      Watch Fox News Channel Live: http://www.foxnewsgo.com/

      FOX News Channel (FNC) is a 24-hour all-encompassing news service delivering breaking news as well as political and business news. The number one network in cable, FNC has been the most-watched television news channel for 18 consecutive years. According to a 2020 Brand Keys Consumer Loyalty Engagement Index report, FOX News is the top brand in the country for morning and evening news coverage. A 2019 Suffolk University poll named FOX News as the most trusted source for television news or commentary, while a 2019 Brand Keys Emotion Engagement
      Analysis survey found that FOX News was the most trusted cable news brand. A 2017 Gallup/Knight Foundation survey also found that among Americans who could name an objective news source, FOX News was the top-cited outlet. Owned by FOX Corporation, FNC is available in nearly 90 million homes and dominates the cable news landscape, routinely notching the top ten programs in the genre.

      https://conservativevideoalerts.com/former-dea-agent-issues-dire-warning-as-border-crisis-surges/
      \\][//

      Like

  2. John Pilger reveals the American plan: a new Pearl Harbour

    Two years ago a project set up by the men who now surround George W Bush said what America needed was a “catastrophic and catalysing event”.
    SIGN-UP
    BY
    JOHN PILGER

    The threat posed by US terrorism to the security of nations and individuals was outlined in prophetic detail in a document written more than two years ago and disclosed only recently. What was needed for America to dominate much of humanity and the world’s resources, it said, was “some catastrophic and catalysing event – like a new Pearl Harbor”.

    The attacks of 11 September 2001 provided the “new Pearl Harbor”, described as “the opportunity of ages”. The extremists who have since exploited 11 September come from the era of Ronald Reagan, when far-right groups and “think-tanks” were established to avenge the American “defeat” in Vietnam. In the 1990s, there was an added agenda: to justify the denial of a “peace dividend” following the cold war. The Project for the New American Century was formed, along with the American Enterprise Institute, the Hudson Institute and others that have since merged the ambitions of the Reagan administration with those of the current Bush regime.

    One of George W Bush’s “thinkers” is Richard Perle. I interviewed Perle when he was advising Reagan; and when he spoke about “total war”, I mistakenly dismissed him as mad. He recently used the term again in describing America’s “war on terror”. “No stages,” he said. “This is total war. We are fighting a variety of enemies. There are lots of them out there. All this talk about first we are going to do Afghanistan, then we will do Iraq . . . this is entirely the wrong way to go about it. If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely and we don’t try to piece together clever diplomacy, but just wage a total war . . . our children will sing great songs about us years from now.”

    Perle is one of the founders of the Project for the New American Century, the PNAC. Other founders include Dick Cheney, now vice-president, Donald Rumsfeld, defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz, deputy defence secretary, I Lewis Libby, Cheney’s chief of staff, William J Bennett, Reagan’s education secretary, and Zalmay Khalilzad, Bush’s ambassador to Afghanistan. These are the modern chartists of American terrorism.

    The PNAC’s seminal report, Rebuilding America’s Defences: strategy, forces and resources for a new century, was a blueprint of American aims in all but name. Two years ago it recommended an increase in arms-spending by $48bn so that Washington could “fight and win multiple, simultaneous major theatre wars”. This has happened. It said the United States should develop “bunker-buster” nuclear weapons and make “star wars” a national priority. This is happening. It said that, in the event of Bush taking power, Iraq should be a target. And so it is.

    As for Iraq’s alleged “weapons of mass destruction”, these were dismissed, in so many words, as a convenient excuse, which it is. “While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification,” it says, “the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.”

    How has this grand strategy been implemented? A series of articles in the Washington Post, co-authored by Bob Woodward of Watergate fame and based on long interviews with senior members of the Bush administration, reveals how 11 September was manipulated.

    On the morning of 12 September 2001, without any evidence of who the hijackers were, Rumsfeld demanded that the US attack Iraq. According to Woodward, Rumsfeld told a cabinet meeting that Iraq should be “a principal target of the first round in the war against terrorism”. Iraq was temporarily spared only because Colin Powell, the secretary of state, persuaded Bush that “public opinion has to be prepared before a move against Iraq is possible”. Afghanistan was chosen as the softer option. If Jonathan Steele’s estimate in the Guardian is correct, some 20,000 people in Afghanistan paid the price of this debate with their lives.

    Time and again, 11 September is described as an “opportunity”. In last April’s New Yorker, the investigative reporter Nicholas Lemann wrote that Bush’s most senior adviser, Condoleezza Rice, told him she had called together senior members of the National Security Council and asked them “to think about ‘how do you capitalise on these opportunities'”, which she compared with those of “1945 to 1947”: the start of the cold war.

    Since 11 September, America has established bases at the gateways to all the major sources of fossil fuels, especially central Asia. The Unocal oil company is to build a pipeline across Afghanistan. Bush has scrapped the Kyoto Protocol on greenhouse gas emissions, the war crimes provisions of the International Criminal Court and the anti-ballistic missile treaty. He has said he will use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states “if necessary”. Under cover of propaganda about Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction, the Bush regime is developing new weapons of mass destruction that undermine international treaties on biological and chemical warfare.

    In the Los Angeles Times, the military analyst William Arkin describes a secret army set up by Donald Rumsfeld, similar to those run by Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger and which Congress outlawed. This “super-intelligence support activity” will bring together the “CIA and military covert action, information warfare, and deception”. According to a classified document prepared for Rumsfeld, the new organisation, known by its Orwellian moniker as the Proactive Pre-emptive Operations Group, or P2OG, will provoke terrorist attacks which would then require “counter-attack” by the United States on countries “harbouring the terrorists”.

    In other words, innocent people will be killed by the United States. This is reminiscent of Operation Northwoods, the plan put to President Kennedy by his military chiefs for a phoney terrorist campaign – complete with bombings, hijackings, plane crashes and dead Americans – as justification for an invasion of Cuba. Kennedy rejected it. He was assassinated a few months later. Now Rumsfeld has resurrected Northwoods, but with resources undreamt of in 1963 and with no global rival to invite caution.

    You have to keep reminding yourself this is not fantasy: that truly dangerous men, such as Perle and Rumsfeld and Cheney, have power. The thread running through their ruminations is the importance of the media: “the prioritised task of bringing on board journalists of repute to accept our position”.

    “Our position” is code for lying. Certainly, as a journalist, I have never known official lying to be more pervasive than today. We may laugh at the vacuities in Tony Blair’s “Iraq dossier” and Jack Straw’s inept lie that Iraq has developed a nuclear bomb (which his minions rushed to “explain”). But the more insidious lies, justifying an unprovoked attack on Iraq and linking it to would-be terrorists who are said to lurk in every Tube station, are routinely channelled as news. They are not news; they are black propaganda.

    This corruption makes journalists and broadcasters mere ventriloquists’ dummies. An attack on a nation of 22 million suffering people is discussed by liberal commentators as if it were a subject at an academic seminar, at which pieces can be pushed around a map, as the old imperialists used to do.

    https://www.newstatesman.com/node/192545

    \\][//

    Like

    1. VANITY FAIR produces disinformation to try to blunt the ongoing and persistant popularity of President Trump:

      Inside the Feverish Mind of Donald Trump Two Months After Leaving the White House

      In an hours-long interview with Carol Leonnig and Philip Rucker from his Mar-a-Lago throne, the former president repeated his election lies, bashed Mitch McConnell, and teased a triumphant comeback.

      https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/07/the-feverish-mind-of-trump-after-leaving-the-white-house
      \\][//

      Like

  3. Does this sound like a president who wants to heal the nation? One who wants to bring Americans together with dialogue and understanding? Or does it sound like a fanatic demagogue threatening the half of the nation that didn’t vote for him.

    ____________________________________________________________________

    Joe Biden crossed a major line with this threat about Civil War

    Joe Biden had all hell breaking loose on Tuesday.

    Biden delivered a speech that put jaws on the ground.

    And that’s because Joe Biden crossed a major line with this threat about Civil War.

    “The assault on free and fair elections is just such a threat — literally. I’ve said it before. We’re facing the most significant test of our democracy since the Civil War. It’s not hyperbole — since the Civil War. Confederates, back then, never breached the Capitol as insurrectionists did on January 6. I’m not saying this to alarm you. I’m saying this because you should be alarmed,” Biden declared.

    Biden lied and called laws that strengthen voter ID and ban fraud-prone systems like drive-through voting modern day Jim Crow.

    And Biden received a standing ovation when he declared that Republicans that supported election integrity were “domestic enemies.”

    “I never thought in my entire career I would have to say it. But I swore an oath to you and to God to preserve protect and defend the Constitution. That’s an oath that forms a sacred trust to defend America against all threats both foreign and domestic,” Biden stated.

    Presidents do not use words like “all threats foreign and domestic” lightly.

    That is a call to use force to defend the Constitution.

    Biden’s already called for a new domestic war on terror – targeted at Trump supporters – and this speech was a further escalation in the Biden administration weaponizing the federal government to monitor and potentially arrest the 74,000,000 Americans who voted for Donald Trump.

    https://renewedright.com/joe-biden-crossed-a-major-line-with-this-threat-about-civil-war/

    \\][//

    Like

    1. White House Admits To Flagging Posts To Be Censored By Facebook

      FRIDAY, JUL 16, 2021 – 11:00 PM
      Authored by Jonathan Turley,

      We have previously discussed the extensive censorship programs maintained by Big Tech, including companies like Twitter and Facebook taking sides in major controversies from gender identification to election fraud to Covid-19. The rise of corporate censors has combined with a heavily pro-Biden media to create the fear of a de facto state media that controls information due to a shared ideology rather than state coercion. That concern has been magnified by demands from Democratic leaders for increased censorship, including censoring political speech, and now word that the Biden Administration has routinely been flagging material to be censored by Facebook.

      The concern is obvious that this allows for a direct role of the government in a massive censorship program run by private companies. There have been repeated examples of the censoring of stories that were embarrassing or problematic for the Biden Administration. Even when Twitter expressed regret for the censoring of the Hunter Biden laptop story before the election, there was an immediate push back for greater censorship from Democrats.

      The concern is that these companies are taking to heart calls from Democratic members for increased censorship on the platform. CEO Jack Dorsey previously apologized for censoring the Hunter Biden story before the election. However, rather than addressing the dangers of such censoring of news accounts, Senator Chris Coons pressed Dorsey to expand the categories of censored material to prevent people from sharing any views that he considers “climate denialism.” Likewise, Senator Richard Blumenthal seemed to take the opposite meaning from Twitter, admitting that it was wrong to censor the Biden story. Blumenthal said that he was “concerned that both of your companies are, in fact, backsliding or retrenching, that you are failing to take action against dangerous disinformation.” Accordingly, he demanded an answer to this question:

      “Will you commit to the same kind of robust content modification playbook in this coming election, including fact checking, labeling, reducing the spread of misinformation, and other steps, even for politicians in the runoff elections ahead?”

      “Robust content modification” seems the new Orwellian rallying cry in our society.

      Glenn Greenwald
      @ggreenwald
      ·
      23h
      Seriously, who the fuck is the White House to be dictating who should and should not be banned from social media platforms, to keep lists of who they think are the spreaders of “misinformation,” and then pressure companies they regulate to obey? This is pernicious shit:
      _____________________________________

      The back channel coordination with Facebook further supports the view that this is a de facto state-supporting censorship program. That is the basis for the recent lawsuit by former President Donald Trump. As I have previously noted, there is ample basis for objection to this arrangement but the legal avenue for challenges is far from clear. The lawsuit will face difficult if not insurmountable problems under existing law and precedent. There is no question companies like Twitter are engaging in raw censorship. It is also true that these companies have censored material with a blatantly biased agenda, taking sides on scientific and social controversies. A strong case can be made for stripping these companies of legal protections since they are no longer neutral platforms. However, private businesses are allowed to regulate speech as a general matter. It will take considerable heavy lifting for a court to order this injunctive relief.

      This is why I have described myself as an Internet Originalist:

      The alternative is “internet originalism” — no censorship. If social media companies returned to their original roles, there would be no slippery slope of political bias or opportunism; they would assume the same status as telephone companies. We do not need companies to protect us from harmful or “misleading” thoughts. The solution to bad speech is more speech, not approved speech.

      If Pelosi demanded that Verizon or Sprint interrupt calls to stop people saying false or misleading things, the public would be outraged. Twitter serves the same communicative function between consenting parties; it simply allows thousands of people to participate in such digital exchanges. Those people do not sign up to exchange thoughts only to have Dorsey or some other internet overlord monitor their conversations and “protect” them from errant or harmful thoughts.

      The actions by Twitter and Facebook on Election Day were reprehensible and wrong. That should have been sufficient cause for action by Congress. It is now growing more precarious and chilling by the day.

      https://www.zerohedge.com/political/white-house-admits-flagging-posts-be-censored-facebook

      \\][//

      Like

  4. Every Left-Wing Attempt To Prosecute Trump Has Failed

    Political prosecutions are not new in America. Political pogroms are. It is sad to watch the Democratic Party embrace such third-world practices as policy. It is sadder to note there has never in history been a more sustained yet unsuccessful political effort to oust or destroy one man.

    Even before Donald Trump took office, Democrats claimed Russia elected him as the Manchurian candidate. The intelligence community-Democratic Party-media tripartite axis then swung for the fences, using wiretaps obtained through FISA fraud, honeytraps, Australian and Israeli cutouts, intel scrubbed by GHQ, and every other trick in the spy business. They came up so empty-handed even a Deep State O.G. like Robert Mueller could not find anything indictable.

    They came up so empty-handed even a Deep State O.G. like Robert Mueller could not find anything indictable. Mueller is a forgotten hero, knowing he had nothing and willing to let his legacy fade to black, rather than be remembered as the guy who took a dump on the rule of law. You won’t see such courage in failure again; keep reading.

    Despite their beat down over Russiagate’s failed putsch, post-Mueller the Democrats almost immediately set out to impeach Trump on much of nothing. An anonymous whistleblower was planted and then dug up among the intel community, and impeachment hearings kicked off with the speed of a prefabbed barn erection. A long string of State Department clones and one sad-sack warrior-bureaucrat basically said they didn’t care for Trump’s Ukraine policy—so let’s impeach him.

    The whole thing collapsed because a) there was no impeachable offense and b) the more Democrats rooted in the pigsty for evidence against Trump the more they kept ending up with the Joe and Hunter Biden Ukraine scandal in front of them.

    Not content with one failed impeachment, the Democrats impeached Trump a second time, as a private citizen after he had left office. The set up was to exaggerate unorganized vandalism at the Capitol into a full-on coup attempt. Left out was that the vandals had no path whatsoever to overturning the election, were quickly chased out of the building, and then just went home. The imagined Reichstag moment was then pasted onto Trump’s back like a “kick me” sign in full defiance of established speech-as-incitement rules. A silly show trial failed. Again.

    This level of paranoid vengeance is scary, a sign that a portion of the electorate’s critical thinking skills have been eaten by political syphilis. The Democrats should carefully consider the secondary effects of their actions, and ask (as voters will) if the goal is law enforcement or a political kill shot. If it is the latter, they better not miss. Again.

    ###
    https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/every-left-wing-attempt-to-prosecute-trump-has-failed

    \\][//

    Like


    1. Happy CENSORSHIP of July 4th!

      America’s burgeoning censorship movement had a great week. The White House jumped on board, with a matter-of-fact announcement that it was now helping Facebook flag “problematic posts”:

      Matt Taibbi

      \\][//

      Like

    2. Now They Are Saying That The Republican Party Is The #1 “National Security Threat To The United States Of America”

      Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,

      When one major political party starts labeling the other major political party as a “national security threat”, that should set off major alarm bells because that means that total tyranny is very near. Needless to say, Democrats and Republicans have always had bitter words for one another, but when you start calling the other side a “national security threat” that is taking things to an entirely different level. Al-Qaeda was a “national security threat”, and so we invaded Afghanistan. ISIS was a “national security threat”, and so we bombed them into oblivion. The full weight of U.S. power is often used to “neutralize” national security threats, and so when a former Department of Homeland Security official went on MSNBC and said that the Republican Party is now a more serious national security threat than either Al-Qaeda or ISIS, that sent chills down the spines of a whole lot of people…

      Miles Taylor, a former Department of Homeland Security (DHS) official, made the comment during a Thursday interview on MSNBC’s “The Reid Out.”

      “I’ve spent my whole career not as a political operative. I’ve never worked on a campaign in my life other than campaigning against Trump. I’m a national security guy. I’ve worked in national security against ISIS, al Qaeda and Russia,” Taylor said.

      “And the No. 1 national security threat I’ve ever seen in my life to this country’s democracy is the party that I’m in — the Republican Party. It is the No. 1 security national security threat to the United States of America,” he said.

      I couldn’t believe that he actually said that.

      In the past, members of the Biden administration have labeled certain political subgroups as national security threats, but now Miles Taylor is saying that the entire Republican Party is the number one national security threat that our nation is facing.

      Just think about what that means.

      When we would capture a member of Al-Qaeda or ISIS, we would ship them off to Guantanamo Bay and torture them for months or even years.

      I always spoke out against such torture, because it was morally wrong.

      And I knew that eventually the same tactics would be used against Americans.

      With each passing day, the U.S. is getting closer and closer to becoming an authoritarian regime. On Friday, we learned that the Biden administration has been regularly working with social media companies to censor the speech of people that are concerned about the safety of the COVID vaccines…

      President Biden on Friday accused Facebook of “killing people,” just after White House press secretary Jen Psaki said the Biden administration is “in regular touch” with the platform to ensure correct “narratives” are promoted — elaborating on her Thursday admission that the White House is “flagging problematic posts” for the social media giant to censor.

      Social media companies are private entities, and so they can theoretically argue that they have the right to determine what is allowed to be posted on their platforms.

      But when the federal government colludes with social media companies to censor speech, that is a crystal clear violation of our First Amendment rights.

      As Glenn Greenwald has noted, if you support the Biden administration’s attempts to censor speech on social media platforms, that also makes you an authoritarian…

      In an eight-tweet thread posted Thursday afternoon, Greenwald said this idea that a president’s administration can remove content it deems ‘problematic’ is dangerous.

      ‘If you don’t find it deeply disturbing that the White House is “flagging” internet content that they deem “problematic” to their Facebook allies for removal, then you are definitionally an authoritarian. No other information is needed about you to know that,’ Greenwald tweeted.

      Not only is the Biden administration actively involved in censoring speech, they are also specifically demonizing 12 particular individuals that the Biden administration claims are responsible for “65% of anti-vaccine misinformation on social media platforms”…

      The White House turned up the pressure on Silicon Valley to get a handle on vaccine misinformation Thursday, specifically singling out 12 people one group dubbed the “disinformation dozen,” saying they were responsible for a great deal of misinformation about Covid-19.

      “There’s about 12 people who are producing 65% of anti-vaccine misinformation on social media platforms,” White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said Thursday.

      At this point, freedom of speech is virtually a dead right in the United States of America, and that means that all of our other rights are in danger of being completely stripped away as well.

      Because once freedom of speech is gone, the government will be free to take away the rest of our rights at their leisure.

      Never before in U.S. history have we seen such a massive attempt by one side of the political spectrum to silence the speech of the other side of the political spectrum.

      And ultimately, they won’t just be satisfied with shutting people up. In fact, there are some activists that are already wishing death upon their political opponents…

      “Let them die,” Fairfax County NAACP First Vice President Michelle Leete said about people against her leftist ideology during a speech to protesters at Luther Jackson Middle School Thursday evening.

      Parents and concerned citizens had gathered in Fairfax, Virginia, prior to a school board meeting to protest Fairfax County Public Schools teaching Critical Race Theory (CRT), while others had come to support CRT and the LGBT agenda in schools. It was the final meeting before the school board’s summer break.

      There is so much hatred on both sides of the political spectrum right now, and that makes me extremely sad.

      As I discuss in my brand new book entitled “7 Year Apocalypse”, we are moving into a very troubled chapter in American history, and we are doing so at a time when most people are absolutely filled with rage.

      Everywhere you look, people are extremely angry. Our nation has become a tinderbox that can literally erupt in flames at any moment, and we have seen quite a few examples of this over the past year.

      We used to be such a civilized country.

      What in the world has happened to us?

      Freedom is such a precious thing. Previous generations of Americans sacrificed so much to win it for us, and now we are on the verge of losing it for good.

      https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/now-they-are-saying-republican-party-1-national-security-threat-united-states-america

      \\][//

      Like

      1. “This Is Worrying Me Quite A Bit”: mRNA Vaccine Inventor Shares Viral Thread Showing COVID Surge In Most-Vaxxed Countries

        Dr. Robert Malone, a pioneer in the field of mRNA vaccines, shared a viral Twitter thread on Friday which lays out a disturbing trend; the most-vaccinated countries in the world are experiencing a surge in COVID-19 cases, while the least-vaccinated countries are not.

        “This is worrying me quite a bit,” tweeted Malone, embedding the lengthy thread authored by Twitter user @holmenkollin (Corona Realism) via the ‘thread reader’ app.

        Corona Realism 🟢
        @holmenkollin
        ·
        Jul 16
        Something really odd is going on:

        In Europe we are seeing surges at many places where most of the population has already been vaccinated.

        At the same time, the 15 least vaccinated countries don‘t seem to face any problem.

        At some point, denying this problem will get painful.

        At this point, some of the early-bird lockdowners take notice:

        Why is my fully masked and vacced state not keeping cases down?

        You see how dangerous delta is??
        Bob Wachter
        @Bob_Wachter
        If you’re wondering how bad Delta really is, even in highly vaccinated SF (76% of >age 12 fully vaxxed) & still w/ a lot of masking (most folks in stores), we’re seeing a pretty steep Covid uptick. Daily cases up 4-fold (10->42; Fig L), hospital pts doubled (9->19; R)(Thread 1/4)

        Corona Realism 🟢
        @holmenkollin
        +1

        „But what about 100% vaccination rate?“

        Here you go: 1600 double-jabbed british soldiers on HMS Queen Elizabeth. They even had hygiene rules, distancing etc

        Wait 2 months…

        1 in 16 (= higher case rate than any country!) turns out to be infected.
        Corona-Ausbruch auf britischem Flugzeugträger
        Auf dem neuen britischen Flugzeugträg

        https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/worrying-me-quite-bit-mrna-vaccine-inventor-shares-viral-thread-showing-covid-surge-most

        \\][//

        Like

      2. Biden Moves Toward Gutting the First Amendment
        Michael Goodwin, New York Post July 18, 2021

        Any assessment of Joe Biden’s performance last week runs into an obstacle. While it was awful from start to finish, the hard part is ­deciding which was the absolute worst moment.

        Any assessment of Joe Biden’s performance last week runs into an obstacle. While it was awful from start to finish, the hard part is ­deciding which was the absolute worst moment.

        Was it the president’s latest attack on state voting law reforms, which he bizarrely called “the most significant test of our democracy since the Civil War”?

        Was it the administration’s outrageous invitation for the pampered popinjays at the United Nations to sit in judgment of America’s racial strife?

        Or perhaps it was Biden’s decision to push a one-party spending spree of trillions of dollars even as inflation levels reached their highest mark in 13 years?

        Under almost any president, each of those events would qualify as a low point. But Biden is proving to be spectacularly awful at his job, and he did something else that captures the award for the week’s Worst of the Worst.

        Friday, the president accused Facebook of “killing people” and demanded it silence those opposed to or questioning the coronavirus vaccines.

        Coming from the president, this is a breathtaking accusation and demand.

        It far exceeds anything Donald Trump ever said or did. Trump wrongly called some media “the enemy of the people,” but never accused them of actually “killing people.”

        But Biden has — recklessly — and no doubt assumes the lapdog news media will echo his charge.

        Notably, Facebook’s defense is that it is silencing as many people as it can find who question or criticize the vaccines. That’s hardly a defense of free speech, but rather shows Big Tech fundamentally agrees with Biden’s goal. They just differ on the success rate.

        The alarming approach first emerged with a Wednesday report in Politico about White House plans to fight what it sees as “misinformation” on COVID vaccinations.

        Whoa, Nellie. The White House and the DNC are going to monitor and “dispel misinformation” on social media and private text messages? And work with congenitally-corrupt “fact checkers”?

        My first reaction was this can’t be true.

        Sadly, it is true. Jen Psaki, whose job as press secretary is devoted to making the outlandish sound routine, elaborated on the plan Thursday and confirmed it’s already in operation.

        So the government is not only “flagging” people it doesn’t like, it’s also helping to “boost trusted content.”

        “It’s important to take faster action against harmful posts,” Psaki added. “As you all know, information travels quite quickly on social media platforms. Sometimes it’s not accurate, and Facebook needs to move more quickly to remove harmful violative posts.”

        Her words, “not accurate” and “harmful violative posts,” are so vague as to give the government an open-ended license to push Facebook and other platforms to censor almost anything somebody in the White House doesn’t like.

        t might start with disagreements over COVID, but why would it end there? Suppose there’s a story about, oh, let’s take a wild stab and say the foreign business interests of the president’s son that also implicate the president.

        Might there be any pressure on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and others to block the story from being shared? Does any of this sound familiar?

        Or, more simply, how about the fact that today’s “misinformation” on COVID is tomorrow’s approved “information?”

        Recall that government officials, including the unreliable weathervane, Dr. Anthony Fauci, switched directions so many times it’s hard to say with certainty what the latest official line is.

        If that weren’t bad enough, Psaki dug a deeper hole Friday by arguing that people banned from one social media platform should also be banned from others. Her proposal effectively urges the companies to create a unified ban against American citizens.

        On top of Biden’s inflammatory accusation, her remarks and the government’s actions make it clear we are far down the slippery slope.

        There’s already one example of the potential impacts. The Post’s expose on Hunter Biden’s laptop last October was blocked by Big Tech for two crucial weeks while voting in the presidential election was underway.

        That restriction was done for partisan purposes by private companies. Imagine if the government had demanded the blackout, as it is doing now on vaccines and who knows what else.

        The First Amendment protects the right to disagree with the government. But two developments are converging that make this moment so ominous.

        First, the Big Tech platforms are so huge that they really operate as monopolies. When they work together as one, as they did in squelching the Hunter Biden stories, they have almost absolute power to shape events. They even silenced Trump when he was president, a blackout that continues.

        Second, some Democrats and others on the left embrace the cancel culture habit of silencing dissent. What started on college campuses has metastasized into a national phenomenon, with even large companies insisting that some routine disagreements are intolerable and must be banned.

        And now we have the government endorsing these developments and trying to unite them. The effort is not a mere suggestion, as Biden’s demand to the social media platforms carries an implicit threat of government compulsion.

        As such, the administration is moving toward gutting the First Amendment and controlling private companies. That’s a new low, even for Biden.

        https://nypost.com/2021/07/17/joe-bidens-troubling-technique-goodwin/

        SEE ALSO

        Facebook exec says platform is a ‘scapegoat’ for Biden’s vaccine failure
        “Within the Surgeon General’s Office, we’re flagging posts for Facebook that spread disinformation,” Psaki said. “We’re working with doctors and medical professionals to connect medical experts with people, who are popular with their audiences, with accurate information and boost trusted content. So, we’re helping get trusted content out there.”

        SEE ALSO

        Smoking-gun email reveals how Hunter Biden introduced Ukrainian businessman to VP dad
        Later, a poll found most voters were not aware of the stories and some 8 percent said they would have voted differently had they known the facts.

        \\][//

        Like

      3. ‘Shadow State’: Embracing corporate governance to escape constitutional limits
        ‘Shadow State’: Dems Advocate for Corporate Governance
        Jonathan Turley, The Hill July 18, 2021

        Teddy Roosevelt gave a speech in 1902, “The Control of Corporations,” which warned of the danger of corporate power over citizens’ lives. Calling corporations “creatures of the state,” he said they must be controlled by “the representatives of the public.” Roosevelt was a Republican, but his distrust of corporations (and his later faith in big government) would become a touchstone of Democratic politics for generations, from the Great Depression to the Great Society.

        Like the reversal of Earth’s magnetic poles, American politics now seems suddenly to have flipped: Democratic leaders increasingly advocate for corporate governance while Republicans voice populist themes. From supporting the largest censorship programs in history to privately mandated vaccine “passports,” liberals are looking to companies like Apple or American Airlines to carry out social programs free from constitutional and political limits imposed on the government.

        This new model of governance was evident when White House press secretary Jen Psaki was asked about a mandated vaccine passport system. She responded that it is “not currently the role of the federal government” but noted that the administration hopes to see such a mandate from “private-sector entities, universities, institutions that are starting to mandate, and that’s an innovative step that they will take and they should take.”

        ADVERTISEMENT
        This use of corporations is born out of political and legal convenience. Despite the rising call for mandatory vaccinations, the Biden administration clearly is not willing to face the political costs of a government mandate. As of July 11, 159,266,536 Americans were fully vaccinated — 48 percent of the country’s population. When you consider the extremely high rate of vaccination for those over 65 (an estimated 85 percent), the percentage of adults under 65 is even smaller. That is a lot of voters who would not take well to a government mandate before the 2022 election. Moreover, the Supreme Court upheld a mandatory state vaccine in 1905, but any federal mandate could face constitutional challenges.

        Private companies, however, have great leeway in dictating such conditions. So some, like CNN medical analyst Dr. Leana Wen, have called for coercive measures making it “hard for people to remain unvaccinated.” That coercion would come from private companies which would deny people access to travel, restaurants, movies, schools and other aspects of modern life. Thus, as with Psaki’s statement, the Biden White House is signaling private companies to implement such a national passport system.

        And companies are listening.

        Recently, Morgan Stanley declared that all employees must get a vaccine to return to work. While some many have religious objections, Morgan Stanley CEO James Gorman made clear in July that employees would face what Wen called “hard” times if they tried to work from home: “If you want to get paid New York rates, you work in New York. None of this, ‘I’m in Colorado … and getting paid like I’m sitting in New York City.’ Sorry, that doesn’t work.” The message could not be clearer that working remotely will come at a penalty.

        If successful, corporations will manage a system of barriers and penalties to isolate the vaccine-hesitant into smaller and smaller spaces of existence. Citizens would find it increasingly difficult to be able to travel or dine out unless they meet the demands of corporate policies.

        The political convenience of relying on corporate controls is most evident in the support for a massive system of corporate-based speech controls now implanted in the United States. The government cannot implement a censorship system under the Constitution — but it can outsource censorship functions to private companies like Facebook and Twitter. Just this week, the White House admitted it has been flagging “misinformation” for Facebook to censor. At the same time, Democrats like Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) have demanded that Big Tech companies commit to even more “robust content modification” — an Orwellian term for censorship. Liberal writers and media figures have called for corporate censorship despite the danger of an effective state media run through private corporations. Even Columbia Journalism Dean and New Yorker writer Steve Coll has denounced the First Amendment right to freedom of speech being “weaponized” to protect disinformation.

        The public is now required to discuss public controversies within the lines and limits set by corporate censors — with the guidance of the government. Twitter barred reporting on Hunter Biden’s laptop until after the 2020 election. Facebook only recently announced that people on its platform may discuss the origins of COVID-19, after previously censoring such discussion — but it still bars opposing views on vaccinations and the pandemic. Other companies actively block wayward thoughts and views; last week, YouTube was fined by a German court for censoring videos of protests over COVID restrictions. Meanwhile, Twitter censored criticism of the Indian government meant to expose mismanagement of the pandemic that is costing lives.

        The common refrain from the left is that corporate censorship is not a limit on free speech because the First Amendment only addresses government limits on speech. That not only maximizes the power of corporations but minimizes the definition of free speech. Free speech is not exclusively contained in the First Amendment. It includes the full range of speech in society in both private and public forums. Yet, liberals — who once opposed the recognition of corporate free speech rights in cases like Citizen’s United — are now great advocates for corporate speech rights, in order to justify the censorship of opposing views.

        Social media companies are not just any businesses, however. They were created as neutral platforms for communication between people when they were given special immunity from lawsuits. Yet these corporations now control an enormous amount of public discourse and have become a rising threat to the democratic process, expanding their authority to frame the debate on issues ranging from climate change to gender identity, from election fraud to public health. You must espouse the “truth” as established by these companies on certain questions or risk being banned as “misinformation spreaders.” Indeed, Psaki this week insisted that once people are banned by one company, they should be banned from all social media companies.

        If these trends continue, citizens could find themselves effectively exiled by order of corporate governors — unable to travel or go to school while also barred from espousing dissenting views on social media. They would, effectively, be “disappeared” within a shadow state that lacks any electoral or appellate process, a dystopian brave new world that could become all too real if we allow elected officials to use corporate surrogates to control the essential aspects of our lives.

        Decades after Teddy Roosevelt’s warning about corporate control, his cousin Franklin — a Democrat — warned that the “first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself.” That warning is worth repeating — indeed, worth tweeting … if Twitter will allow it.

        Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can find his updates on Twitter @JonathanTurley.

        https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/563520-shadow-state-embracing-corporate-governance-to-escape-constitutional-limits

        \\][//

        Like

  5. Scipio Africanus 45 min ago

    It’s such a dangerous period in the US.

    There is a fusion of ideological extremism (far left Marxism, led by Obama) and eye-watering corruption/criminality by the two main establishment parties, but in particular the Democratic Party. Together their allegiance forms an elite.

    The two groups appear to have struck a Faustian bargain. One group is addicted to money. The other, to power. Both despise the concept of the US Constitution, as it restrains them from pursuing their goals. Essentially, they need each other to survive/prosper.

    The institutional corruption has always been there, especially the bi-partisan rot in the US Congress (a thoroughly corrupted institution), however the true extent of it was not visible to most citizens until Trump was elected in 2016.

    The thing that frightens them the most is that they now know that their criminality and corruption cannot be hidden. It is now known by millions of citizens, Trump’s 75 million voters being a very good example.

    What concerns me – as Glenn’s article demonstrates, and Psaki’s frightening comments about goveenment targeting of speech on social media seems to confirm – is the arrogant and brazen way that this elite is exploiting power. They do not appear to understand the reality of their situation – they are exposed and being watched, daily, by millions of extremely angry and disgusted citizens.

    There does not appear to be a calm voice in the room, a mafia consiglieri if you will, pointing out that intimidating and threatening a citizen body that large (at least 75 million, many heavily armed) and in such a brazen and arrogant manner, may create a situation that the crooks cannot control, and which risks threatening their money and power.

    Without that calm voice, history shows us what can happen when criminal gangs and ideologues take over nation states. Anyone who thinks it can’t happen in America is delusional. It IS happening, right now, in front of our eyes.

    The American Republic is an experiment , precisely because it was designed to prevent crooks and power hungry tyrants taking over. Sadly, the current gang in DC is the historical norm, not an exception. Xi’s CCP is by history’s standard, entirely normal. As was the Roman Imperial hegemony. That’s what so many people fail to understand.

    The Republic cannot survive on its own steam. It is not a normal creature.

    America needs a miracle. That miracle is the dismantling of the elite alliance that I have referred to above. How that happens, I cannot tell. But it needs to happen fast and soon, or the lights will go out in America quickly. Once that happens, we don’t enter unknown territory. In fact, we revert back to the historical norm, a dystopian nightmare of centralised power,.state intimidation and worse, as well as enforced citizen subservience.

    Sorry for the long post, but like many, the unravelling situation in the US is very worrying and I needed to share my thoughts.

    Stay safe out there, folks.

    greenwald.substack.com/p/nancy-and-paul-pelosi-making-millions/comments?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjoyODc1MDE5OSwicG9zdF9pZCI6Mzg3OTEyNDQsIl8iOiJLL1B1MSIsImlhdCI6MTYyNjQ

    Like

  6. The US Constitution established a Republic. The FORM is repulican. Yes the democratic mechanism is employed in which the representatives of the federal government are chosen in general elections. But as far as the presidency is concerned even that process is tempered by the republican process of an Electoral College to make the final decision of who will become the president.

    As has been noted by Mr.Africanus in his excellent commentary, a large portion of the US politicians are not at all satisfied with the system created by the United States Constitution and have taken it upon themselves to rule by fiat, while attempting to give the perception of adherence to the Constitution. This burlesque has become more and more obvious in the years since President Trump was elected President.

    Trump’s unique approach was singularly constitutional in manner, which created a distinct contrast to what had come before. It showed an unfavorable light on the people in power taking advantage of the system like a party of drunken pirates. Once seen in the light of day these scoundrels left an indelible image on the patriots who support President Trump. These cockroaches can scamper back under the rug and behind the closed doors of their offices, but they are now identified as a group and as specific individuals.

    They are now like cornered rats…much more dangerous than ever before because they now fear the repercussions of their hubris and folly.

    We have heard their recent murmerings of threats against the Trump supporters from both Biden and his supposed henchman General Milley the Woke.

    Prepare, a call to the ramparts may be near.

    \\][//

    Like

  7. Going Underground: Oliver Stone exposes JFK assassination cover-up — OUTSTANDING

    Oliver Stone Exposes JFK Assassination Cover-Up (JFK Revisited) – YouTube

    On this episode of Going Underground, we speak to legendary film director Oliver Stone about his new film ‘JFK Revisited: Through The Looking Glass’. He discusses JFK’s often overlooked campaigns for peace with the Soviet Union and Cuba prior to his assassination, as well as work furthering civil rights, the details exposing an alleged cover-up of the assassination of JFK, including rapid policy changes from the successor LBJ administration, and alleged CIA involvement in the assassination, why larger powers wanted John F. Kennedy dead, JFK’s preparations to shatter the CIA and his belief that the war in Vietnam was a mistake, how the events leading up to the assassination of JFK were meticulously planned and the CIA’s involvement on the day, Lee Harvey-Oswald’s supervision by the CIA, and much more!

    Listen on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/rt/id1457821689?i=1000528833406

    \\][//

    Like

  8. Former President Donald Trump called the Russia collusion investigation a hoax. Actually, it may be worse than that — it may have been a crime.

    Special counsel John Durham’s investigation into the probe against the former president is likely to result in more prosecutions even if it is narrower than previously hoped, according to the Washington Examiner. Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA), a ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, made this assessment on what’s been uncovered so far and what’s still left to be examined.

    During the 2016 presidential election, the FBI obtained Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrants to spy on the Trump campaign, Fox News reported. The problem was that they relied on faulty opposition research to launch the probe in the first place, causing many to speculate it was purposely undertaken to bring him down Trump with the meritless claim.

    To get to the bottom of this, Durham began his own investigation over two years ago to examine whether there was FBI misconduct. Bill Barr, Attorney General at the time, appointed Durham in May 2019 to the role.

    While there has been some worry that President Joe Biden will shut down the probe, Durham’s appointment mostly shields him from the president’s power. Also, though Biden’s attorney general, Merrick Garland, wouldn’t say during his Senate Judiciary Committee hearings in February whether he would protect the probe, he’s also said he has no reason to shut it down.

    Nunes is confident it will turn something up. “I’m still positive, and I guess I have to be, that people are going to go to jail, and they are going to be prosecuted for the Russia grand fiasco and the Russia hoax,” he reportedly said on the “Sara Carter Show” podcast. While Nunes hoped it would be broader, he’s hopeful that it will be fruitful against some “major perpetrators” in the situation based on preliminary success.

    “I think, as you and everybody else know, we’ve made over 14 criminal referrals,” Nunes noted. “That doesn’t mean 14 individuals. That means 14 different criminal referrals involving multiple individuals.”

    It seems the Russia collusion investigation was launched under faulty pretenses from the start, lending credence to Trump’s assessment that this was all a witch hunt. Add to this that no wrongdoing was ever found and that information was uncovered demonstrating that individuals involved were against him, it seems this entire debacle was problematic from day one.

    https://americandigest.com/nunes-durham-report-likely-comes-with-prosecutions/

    \\][//

    Like

  9. Cass Sunstein,was top Obama adviser on regulations,

    White House regulatory czar Cass Sunstein, an intellectual mentor to President Obama whose skeptical approach to rule-making frustated the president’s liberal allies.

    Sunstein became infamous for his controversial publication ‘Conspiracy Theories’ with coauthor, Adrian Vermeule.

    In that book Sunstein advised that the government must become proactive in countering dangerous and inacurate “conspiracy theoris” by infiltrating web forums with covert agents who would create “cognitive dissonance’ in the forums by a set of techniques detailed in his manual.

    There was such a backlash from those who cherish free speech, that at one point he was confronted by journalist who wanted him to defend his “fascitic views” — Suntein was caught on video saying he had never written any such book about conspiracy thoeries. that the journalist must have him confused with someone else!!

    _____________________________________________

    Conspiracy Theories

    Cass R. Sunstein
    Adrian Vermeule

    Publication Date

    2008

    Abstract

    Many millions of people hold conspiracy theories; they believe that powerful people have worked together in order to withhold the truth about some important practice or some terrible event. A recent example is the belief, widespread in some parts of the world, that the attacks of 9/11 were carried out not by Al Qaeda, but by Israel or the United States. Those who subscribe to conspiracy theories may create serious risks, including risks of violence, and the existence of such theories raises significant challenges for policy and law. The first challenge is to understand the mechanisms by which conspiracy theories prosper; the second challenge is to understand how such theories might be undermined. Such theories typically spread as a result of identifiable cognitive blunders, operating in conjunction with informational and reputational influences. A distinctive feature of conspiracy theories is their self-sealing quality. Conspiracy theorists are not likely to be persuaded by an attempt to dispel their theories; they may even characterize that very attempt as further proof of the conspiracy. Because those who hold conspiracy theories typically suffer from a “crippled epistemology,” in accordance with which it is rational to hold such theories, the best response consists in cognitive infiltration of extremist groups. Various policy dilemmas, such as the question whether it is better for government to rebut conspiracy theories or to ignore them, are explored in this light.

    https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/law_and_economics/119/

    \\][//

    Like

    1. Executive Order 8985 Establishing the Office of Censorship.
      December 19, 1941
      Statement:

      All Americans abhor censorship, just as they abhor war. But the experience of this and of all other Nations has demonstrated that some degree of censorship is essential in wartime, and we are at war.

      The important thing now is that such forms of censorship as are necessary shall be administered effectively and in harmony with the best interests of our free institutions.

      It is necessary to the national security that military information which might be of aid to the enemy be scrupulously withheld at the source.

      It is necessary that a watch be set upon our borders, so that no such information may reach the enemy, inadvertently or otherwise, through the medium of the mails, radio, or cable transmission, or by any other means.

      It is necessary that prohibitions against the domestic publication of some types of information, contained in long-existing statutes, be rigidly enforced.

      Finally, the Government has called upon a patriotic press and radio to abstain voluntarily from the dissemination of detailed information of certain kinds, such as reports of the movements of vessels and troops. The response has indicated a universal desire to cooperate.

      In order that all of these parallel and requisite undertakings may be coordinated and carried forward in accordance with a single uniform policy, I have appointed Byron Price, Executive News Editor of the Associated Press, to be Director of Censorship, responsible directly to the President. He has been granted a leave of absence by the Associated Press and will take over the post assigned him within the coming week, or sooner.

      Executive Order:

      By virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the statutes of the United States, and particularly by section 303, Title III of the Act of December 18, 1941, Public Law 354, 77th Congress, 1st session, and deeming that the public safety demands it, I hereby order as follows:

      1. There is hereby established the Office of Censorship, at the head of which shall be a Director of Censorship. The Director of Censorship shall cause to be censored, in his absolute discretion, communications by mail, cable, radio, or other means of transmission passing between the United States and any foreign country or which may be carried by any vessel or other means of transportation touching at any port, place, or Territory of the United States and bound to or from any foreign country, in accordance with such rules and regulations as the President shall from time to time prescribe. The establishment of rules and regulations in addition to the provisions of this Order shall not be a condition to the exercise of the powers herein granted or the censorship by this Order directed. The scope of this Order shall include all foreign countries except such as may hereafter be expressly excluded by regulation.

      2. There is hereby created a Censorship Policy Board, which shall consist of the Vice President of the United States, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of War, the Attorney General, the Postmaster General, the Secretary of the Navy, the Director of the Office of Government Reports, and the Director of the Office of Facts and Figures. The Postmaster General shall act as Chairman of the Board. The Censorship Policy Board shall advise the Director of Censorship with respect to policy and the coordination and integration of the censorship herein directed.

      3. The Director of Censorship shall establish a Censorship Operating Board, which shall consist of representatives of such departments and agencies of the Government as the Director shall specify. Each representative shall be designated by the head of the department or agency which he represents. The Censorship Operating Board shall, under the supervision of the Director perform such duties with respect to operations as the Director shall determine.

      4. The Director of Censorship is authorized to take all such measures as may be necessary or expedient to administer the powers hereby conferred, and, in addition to the utilization of existing personnel of any department or agency available therefor, to employ, or authorize the employment of, such additional personnel as he may deem requisite.

      5. As used in this Order the term “United States” shall be construed to include the Territories and possessions of the United States, including the Philippine Islands.

      Franklin D. Roosevelt, Executive Order 8985 Establishing the Office of Censorship. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/node/210516

      https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/executive-order-8985-establishing-the-office-censorship

      \\][//

      Like

  10. Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) said that he was confident people would be going to jail as a result of a report soon to be released by special counsel John Durham.
    Nunes, who is the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee, made the comments while being interviewed Thursday on the Sara Carter Show podcast.

    “I’m still positive, and I guess I have to be, that people are going to go to jail, and they are going to be prosecuted for the Russia grand fiasco and the Russia hoax,” Nunes said.

    Durham has been investigating allegations that the probe into Russian collusion with the Trump campaign in the 2016 election was motivated by political interests..

    Nunes offered other details about the Durham report.

    “It may not be as broad as we want it to be,” Nunes said.

    “But look, there are some major perpetrators,” he explained. “I think, as you and everybody else know, we’ve made over 14 criminal referrals. That doesn’t mean 14 individuals. That means 14 different criminal referrals involving multiple individuals.”

    Nunes also offered a warning to the Biden administration against interfering with the conclusion of the Durham investigation.

    “That would be a big issue, especially if Republicans get control back of the Congress because we have subpoena power,” said Nunes.

    Durham’s investigation, which has been ongoing since spring 2019, has so far resulted in just one successful conviction, that of former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith. He plead guilty to altering an email used to justify surveillance on Carter Page, who was working with the Trump 2016 campaign at the time.

    Clinesmith apologized for the error and said that he committed the document falsification only to save himself some time. He was sentenced in January to 12 months probation and 400 hours community service.

    In June, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) said on Fox News that he was angry the report had not been released earlier.

    “We were supposed to have the Durham report over a year ago,” Jordan said. “I just don’t know where that is.”

    https://www.theblaze.com/news/nunes-durham-report-jail-russian

    \\][//

    Like

    1. The American Descent Into Madness
      Victor Davis Hanson, American Greatness — July 19, 2021

      America went from the freest country in the world in December 2019 to a repressive and frightening place by July 2021. How did that happen?

      Nations have often gone mad in a matter of months. The French abandoned their supposedly idealistic revolutionary project and turned it into a monstrous hell for a year between July 1793 and 1794. After the election of November 1860, in a matter of weeks, Americans went from thinking secession was taboo to visions of killing the greatest number of their fellow citizens on both sides of the Mason-Dixon line. Mao’s China went from a failed communist state to the ninth circle of Dante’s Inferno, when he unleashed the Cultural Revolution in 1966.

      In the last six months, we have seen absurdities never quite witnessed in modern America. Madness, not politics, defines it. There are three characteristics of all these upheavals. One, the events are unsustainable. They will either cease or they will destroy the nation, at least as we know it. Two, the law has largely been rendered meaningless. Three, left-wing political agendas justify any means necessary to achieve them.

      Citizenship as Mere Residency
      Two million people are anticipated to cross the southern border, en masse and illegally, over a 12-month period. If that absurdity were to continue, we would be adding the equivalent of a major U.S. city every year. The new arrivals have three things in common: Their first act was to break U.S. law by entering the country. Their second was to break the law by residing here illegally. And their third will be to find false identification or other illegal means to continue breaking the law. One does not arrive as a guest in a foreign country and immediately violate the laws of his host—unless one holds those laws in contempt.

      Arrivals now cross a border that had been virtually closed to illegal immigration by January 2021. In the cynical and immoral logic of illegal immigration (that cares little for the concerns either of would-be legal immigrants or U.S. citizens), arrivals will be dependent upon the state and thus become constituents of progressives who engineered their arrival.

      Yet the issue is not illegal immigration per se. If protests were to continue in Cuba, and 1 million Cubans boated to Miami, the Biden Administration would stop the influx, in terror that so many anti-Communists might tip Florida red forever.

      How strange that the U.S. government is considering going door-to-door to bully the unvaccinated, even as it ignores the daily influx of thousands from Mexico and Latin America, without worrying whether they are carrying or vaccinated for COVID-19. Meanwhile, the progressive media shrilly warns that the new Delta Variant of the virus is exploding south of the border. Note how the administration applies standards to its own citizens that it does not apply to foreign nationals illegally entering the country.

      Crime as Construct
      Crime is another current absurdity. There exists a mini-industry of internet videos depicting young people, disproportionately African American males, stealing luxury goods from Nieman-Marcus in San Francisco, clearing a shelf from a Walgreens with impunity, or assaulting Asian Americans. These iconic moments may be unrepresentative of reality, but given the mass transfers and retirements of police, and the frightening statistics of large increases in violent crime in certain cities, the popular conception is now entrenched that it is dangerous to walk in our major metropolises, either by day or at night. Chicago has turned into Tombstone or Dodge City in the popular imagination.

      Scarier still is the realization that if one is robbed, assaulted, or finds one’s car vandalized, it is near certain the miscreant will never be held to account. Either the police have pulled back and find arrests of criminals a lose-lose situation, or radical big-city district attorneys see the law as a critical legal theory construct, and thus will not enforce it. Or the criminal will be arrested and released within hours.

      So a subculture has developed among Americans, of passing information about where in the country it is safe, where it is not, and where one can go, where one cannot. This is clearly not America, but something bizarre out of Sao Paulo, Durban, or Caracas.

      Be sure to read the entire article at:

      https://amgreatness.com/2021/07/18/the-american-descent-into-madness/

      \\][//

      Like

  11. Jason Whitlock: How Leftist Ideology Is Bigoted

    jason explains how Kamala Harris’ comments about Kinko’s reveal the racist ideology inside the Democratic platform. He tells how an injured football star’s story is an example of a much more liberating way of thinking. WATCH more Fearless with Jason Whitlock ⬇️ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48J83NUmr_Q

    #blazetv #jasonwhitlock #fearless

    ► Subscribe to BlazeTV YouTube! https://bit.ly/2KJHuwu

    ► Join BlazeTV! https://get.blazetv.com/

    \\][//

    Like

      1. Pence, who’s likely to run for president in 2024, resisted pressure from Trump to block congressional certification of Biden’s win on January 6. Pence should have challenged the results from disputed states and sent them back to lawmakers in those locales to resolve, which would have led to a different outcome, Trump said.

        “I think the vice president of the United States must protect the Constitution of the United States,” he said. “I don’t believe he’s just supposed to be a statue who gets these votes from the states and immediately hands them over. If you see fraud, then I believe you have an obligation to do one of a number of things.”

        Barr failed to properly investigate election fraud, such as sending FBI agents to Georgia to probe Fulton County’s vote-counting operations, Trump said. He posited that Barr became exhausted and overly sensitive to media criticism after initially doing a good job in handling the “Russia hoax.”

        “Bill Barr disliked me at the end, in my opinion, and that’s why he made the statement about the election because he did not know” that massive election fraud hadn’t occurred, Trump said, adding, “He started off as a great patriot, but I don’t believe he finished that way.”

        https://www.rt.com/usa/529664-trump-blasts-mcconnell-pence/
        \\][//

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: