Tag: truth

Drain The Swamp?

If there ever was a need in America for a Military Tribunal, this might be a good place to start. These people attempted a Coup’ de’tat on the country and the people of America.

From 2001 to 2005 there was an ongoing investigation into the Clinton Foundation. A Grand Jury had been impaneled. Governments from around the world had donated to the “Charity”.

Yet, from 2001 to 2003 none of those “Donations” to the Clinton Foundation were declared. Now you would think that an honest investigator would be able to figure this out.

Look who took over this investigation in 2005, none other than James Comey. Coincidence? Guess who was transferred into the Internal Revenue Service to run the Tax Exemption Branch of the IRS? None other than, Lois Lerner. Isn’t that interesting?

But this is all just a series of strange coincidences, right? Guess who ran the Tax Division inside the Department of Justice from 2001 to 2005? None other than the Assistant Attorney General of the United States, Rod Rosenstein.
Guess who was the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation during this time frame? Another coincidence (just an anomaly in statistics and chances), but it was Robert Mueller.

What do all four casting characters have in common? They all were briefed and/or were front-line investigators into the Clinton Foundation Investigation. Another coincidence, right?

Fast forward to 2009. James Comey leaves the Justice Department to go and cash-in at Lockheed Martin. Hillary Clinton is running the State Department, official government business, on her own personal email server. The Uranium One “issue” comes to the attention of Hillary. Like all good public servants do, supposedly looking out for America’s best interest, she decides to support the decision and approve the sale of 20% of US Uranium to no other than, the Russians. Now, you would think that this is a fairly straight-up deal, except it wasn’t. America got absolutely nothing out of it.

However, prior to the sales approval, none other than Bill Clinton goes to Moscow, gets paid $500,000 for a one-hour speech; then meets with Vladimir Putin at his home for a few hours. Ok, no big deal, right? Well, not so fast, the FBI had a mole inside the money laundering and bribery scheme.
Robert Mueller was the FBI Director during this time frame. He even delivered a Uranium Sample to Moscow in 2009. Who was handling that case within the Justice Department out of the US Attorney’s Office in Maryland? None other than, Rod Rosenstein.

And what happened to the informant? The Department of Justice placed a gag order on him and threatened to lock him up if he spoke out about it.
How does 20% of the most strategic asset of the United States of America end up in Russian hands when the FBI has an informant, a mole providing inside information to the FBI on the criminal enterprise?

Very soon after; the sale was approved. $145 million dollars in “donations” made their way into the Clinton Foundation from entities directly connected to the Uranium One deal. Guess who was still at the Internal Revenue Service working the Charitable Division? None other than, Lois Lerner.

Ok, that’s all just another series of coincidences, nothing to see here, right? Let’s fast forward to 2015. Due to a series of tragic events in Benghazi and after the 9 “investigations” the House, Senate and at State Department, Trey Gowdy who was running the 10th investigation as Chairman of the Select Committee on Benghazi discovers that Hillary ran the State Department on an unclassified, unauthorized, outlaw personal email server. He also discovered that none of those emails had been turned over when she departed her “Public Service” as Secretary of State which was required by law. He also discovered that there was Top Secret information contained within her personally archived email.

Sparing you the State Departments cover-up, the nostrums they floated, the delay tactics that were employed and the outright lies that were spewed forth
from the necks of the Kerry State Department, we shall leave it with this, they did everything humanly possible to cover for Hillary.

Now, this is amazing, guess who became FBI Director in 2013? None other than James Comey, who secured 17 no-bid contracts for his employer (Lockheed Martin) with the State Department and was rewarded with a $6 million dollar thank you present when he departed his employer? Amazing how all those no-bids just went right through at the State Department. Now he is the FBI Director in charge of the “Clinton Email Investigation” after of course his FBI Investigates the Lois Lerner “Matter” at the Internal Revenue Service and he exonerates her. Nope, couldn’t find any crimes there.

In April 2016, James Comey drafts an exoneration letter of Hillary Rodham Clinton, meanwhile the DOJ is handing out immunity deals like candy. They didn’t even convene a Grand Jury! Like a lightning bolt of statistical impossibility, like a miracle from God himself, like the true “Gangsta” Comey is, James steps out into the cameras of an awaiting press conference on July 5th of 2016 and exonerates Hillary from any wrongdoing.
Do you see the pattern?

It goes on and on, Rosenstein becomes Assistant Attorney General, Comey gets fired based upon a letter by Rosenstein, Comey leaks government information to the press, Mueller is assigned to the Russian Investigation sham by Rosenstein to provide cover for decades of malfeasance within the FBI and DOJ and the story continues.

FISA abuses, political espionage pick a crime, any crime, chances are this group and a few others did it:

 All the same players.
 All compromised and conflicted.
 All working fervently to NOT go to jail themselves.
 All connected in one way or another to the Clinton’s. They are like battery acid; they corrode and corrupt everything they touch. How many lives have these two destroyed?

As of this writing, the Clinton Foundation, in its 20+ years of operation of being the largest International Charity Fraud in the history of mankind, has never been audited by the Internal Revenue Service.

Let us not forget that Comey’s brother works for DLA Piper, the law firm that does the Clinton Foundation’s taxes.

The person that is the common denominator to all the crimes above and still doing her evil escape legal maneuvers at the top of the 3 Letter USA Agencies? Yes, that would be Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Let’s learn a little about Mrs. Lisa H. Barsoomian’s background. Lisa H. Barsoomian, an Attorney that graduated from Georgetown Law, is a protégé of James Comey and Robert Mueller. Barsoomian, with her boss R. Craig Lawrence, represented Bill Clinton in 1998.

Lawrence also represented;
Robert Mueller three times,
James Comey five times,
Barack Obama 45 times,
Kathleen Sebelius 56 times,
Bill Clinton 40 times,
and Hillary Clinton 17 times.
Between 1998 and 2017, Barsoomian herself represented the FBI at least five times.

You may be saying to yourself, who cares about the work history of this Barsoomian woman? Apparently, someone does, because someone out there cares so much that they’ve “purged” all Barsoomian court documents for her Clinton representation in Hamburg vs. Clinton in 1998 and its appeal in 1999 from the DC District and Appeals Court dockets. Someone out there cares so much that even the internet has been “purged” of all information pertaining to Barsoomian.

Historically, this indicates that the individual is a protected CIA operative. Additionally, Lisa Barsoomian has specialized in opposing Freedom of Information Act requests on behalf of the intelligence community. Although Barsoomian has been involved in hundreds of cases representing the DC Office of the US Attorney, her email address is LisaBarsoomian@NIH.gov. The NIH stands for the National Institutes of Health. This is a tactic routinely used by the CIA to protect an operative by using another government organization to shield their activities. It’s a cover, so big deal, right? What does one more attorney with ties to the US intelligence community really matter?

It deals with Trump and his recent tariffs on Chinese steel and aluminum imports, the border wall, DACA, everything coming out of California, the Uni-party unrelenting opposition to President Trump, the Clapper leaks, the Comey leaks, Attorney General Jeff Sessions recusal and subsequent 14-month nap with occasional forays into the marijuana legalization mix and last but not least Mueller’s never-ending investigation into collusion between the Trump team and the Russians.

Why does Barsoomian, CIA operative, merit any mention? Because she is Assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s wife. –. Written by:
Tom Tancredo/Team America

This is how your government works. These are your high paid employees, what they do, how they do it, and consistently get away with crimes against you and me. These are the principal people who need to be arrested, tried and convicted of their crimes against “We the People”. Therefore, I suggest they be put on trial for their crimes.

James Comey
Rod Rosenstein
Robert Mueller
Barack Obama
Jeff Sessions
Hillary Clinton
R. Craig Lawrence
Kathleen Sebelius
Bill Clinton
Lisa Barsoomian
Lois Lerner
John Kerry

If there ever was a need in America for a Military Tribunal, this might be a good place to start. These people attempted a Coup’ de’tat on the country and the people of America.

Further, I would suggest arresting Nancy Pelosi, Governor Gavin Newsom, Eric Holder, Adam Schiff, Jerrold Nadler, Loretta Lynch, Governor Cuomo, Diane Feinstein, and Ralph Northam. Charge then with sedition and treason.

We’re nearly 4 years into this boondoggle. None of these people are going to face the music.

Most statutes of limitations have long run out by now on criminal or civil suits, with few exceptions. Many are immune from lawsuits anyway. These plainly easily solved investigations have been purposefully slow-walked so nothing will occur, and when they are completed, they are inconclusive and simply pass the buck, kick the can, or they are too limited in scope and state there needs to be different investigations.

It’s a total con game, watch the shell…where’s the little pea, charade.

What any reasonably interested human could decipher with a $50 monthly internet connection and some open source research in a long-weekend, these bloated swamp creature fat cats cannot solve crimes in spite of their unlimited budgets and workforce and subpoena powers.

If they were REALLY interested, why is Rosenstein just now sitting for a hearing? He was fired, what, 2 years ago? Maybe 3? It’s unreal. Same with Hillary. She’s just now being subpoenaed for events that occurred FOUR years ago or longer….

It’s certainly feasible that any of these “investigations” could easily bleed into 2021, and theoretically Trump could lose and the new DEM POTUS will just shut it down and move on.

Nothing is going to happen to see justice being served.

Facebook’s Snopes Fact-checkers

Why does this Enquirer-worthy story matter? Well, would you buy a used “fact” from these people? “The eye altering alters all,” observed poet William Blake.

CLAIM: “Facebook ‘fact checker’ who will arbitrate on ‘fake news’ is accused of defrauding website to pay for prostitutes — and its staff includes an escort-porn star and ‘Vice Vixen dome.’”

Although the above is the form used to introduce topics at “fact-checking” website Snopes.com, don’t hold your breath waiting for this particular claim to appear there anytime soon. This isn’t because the quoted sentence, a Daily Mail headline, is true or untrue. It’s because it’s all too revealing about Snopes’ CEO — in a “the emperor has no clothes” kind of way.

The claim of embezzlement was made by Snopes founder Barbara Mikkelson against co-founder and ex-husband David Mikkelson; the pair are locked in a bitter legal dispute in which they accuse each other of financial impropriety.

This he-said/she-said story takes on importance because of what Facebook recently said: that Snopes will be one of the fact-checking outlets it will use to determine if news is “fake” and should, therefore, be discredited and sent to Internet Siberia. Other Facebook fact-checkers are media organs such as ABC, the Associated Press, and Politifact — left-leaning entities all.

Not surprisingly, the Snopes fact-checking couple can’t agree on the facts surrounding their own decoupling. As the Daily Mail reports:

Legal filings seen by DailyMail.com detail a lengthy financial and corporate dispute which stretches long after their divorce, and which one lawyer describes as ‘contentious’ in court documents.

In the filings, Barbara, 57, has accused her former husband, 56, of ‘raiding the corporate business Bardav bank account for his personal use and attorney fees’ without consulting her.

She also claimed he embezzled $98,000 from the company over the course of four years ‘which he expended upon himself and the prostitutes he hired’.

… In court records, Barbara alleged that her ex-husband removed thousands from their business accounts between April and June of 2016 to pay for trips for him and his ‘girlfriend’.

She claimed he spent nearly $10,000 on a 24-day ‘personal vacation’ in India this year and expensed his girlfriend’s plane ticket to Buenos Aires.

‘He’s been depleting the corporate account by spending monies from it on his personal expenses,’ said Barbara in a filing last June.

Of course, David disputes the above. He says the India trip was business-related — he was getting a sense of the culture because he’s considering establishing a fact-checking website on the subcontinent — and that he went to Buenos Aires for a fact-checking conference. The Mail doesn’t indicate that he disputed the allegations about company funds used for prostitutes.

What is not in dispute is that Snopes smacks of a den of iniquity. Having divorced Barbara last year, David married 47-year-old Elyssa Young, a longtime escort and porn actress whose working name is “Erin O’Bryn.” Note, David had previously hired Young to be an “administrative assistant” at Snopes.

Young has an “escort”-oriented Twitter page and website, which the Mail states appear to still be active, and has described herself as “a mature and experienced courtesan [what the less sophisticated call a ‘hooker’], idealist, activist & dreamer.”

The fees she dreams of, and presumably received, are $1,200 for four hours and $5,000 for a full 24. For that you can have “‘an elite and discreet companion’ who ‘understands that while pleasure and passion may be explored in the bedroom, it is hardly the only place,’” wrote Young.

It’s not known if David Mikkelson advertises for hires in a red-light district, but Young is perhaps not the strangest Snopes fact maven. As Breitbart informs, “Writing under the pseudonym Vice Vixen, Snopes fact-checker Kim LaCapria regularly wrote about sex and fetish gear on her own blog, which was described as a lifestyle blog ‘with a specific focus on naughtiness, sin, carnal pursuits, and general hedonism and bonne vivante-ery.’ LaCapria’s blog often featured reviews of sex toys…. On another blog, LaCapria once described what she did on her day off, writing that she ‘played scrabble, smoked pot, and posted to Snopes.’ She then added, ‘That’s what I did on my day ‘on,’ too.’”

In other words, she admitted she has done her Snopes work while stoned.

LaCapria also revealed that she has strong dominatrix instincts and, more bizarrely still, said she was “addicted to smutty HP [Harry Potter] fanfic,” according to the Mail.

Why does this Enquirer-worthy story matter? Well, would you buy a used “fact” from these people? “The eye altering alters all,” observed poet William Blake. People enthusiastically indulging vice and unapologetically proclaiming it are called vice-ridden, and it’s risky to assume that amidst a pattern of vice a person would exhibit the virtue of honesty. Moreover, this quality and another virtue, diligence, are prerequisites for competence. Just ask yourself if you would retain the services of an auto mechanic, a baby-sitter, or a brain surgeon you knew had a LaCapria-like altered eye. Would you want to elect a politician who did?

Losing sight of the virtue/vice character yardstick creates an altered eye resulting in altered judgment. Just consider the Duke University rape frame-up case in 2006. Media and social activists formed a life-rending lynch mob against three white Duke lacrosse players who were falsely accused of rape by black stripper Crystal Mangum (now incarcerated for murder in an unrelated incident). As New York Times public editor Dan Okrent put it, alluding to the prejudices coloring judgment, “It was white over black, it was male over female, it was rich over poor, educated over uneducated.”

In fact, Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong was so corrupt in his prosecutorial efforts of the Duke trio that he was forced to resign and was disbarred. Yet common sense should have informed that strippers aren’t exactly reliable sources. Mind you, I’m not saying a rush to judgment should blithely dismiss such a person’s claims — only that a bigotry-born rush to misjudgment caused them to be blithely labeled gospel.

I will not conform

When the “new normal” is filled with starvation, depression, suicide, child abuse, domestic violence, imprisonment, governmental spying, and pure DESPERATION, the “virus” is going to look preferable to the world you helped facilitate.

I’m sorry but anyone that thinks that social distancing is a good idea for the next few years, actually wants to be micro-chipped or thinks that a ‘benevolent’ dictatorship is for the good of humanity, I don’t want to give that point of view any of my energy.

I am a free Human Being and if you want to stay home, stay home. That’s your sovereign right to choose.

If you want to wear a mask, wear a mask. That’s your sovereign right to choose.

If you want to avoid large crowds, avoid large crowds. That’s your sovereign right to choose

I am not required to descend into poverty for YOU.

I am not required to abstain from human contact for YOU.

I refuse to participate in “quarantine life” until there’s an unsafe, untested vaccine released in eighteen months.

I refuse to receive a vaccine to make others feel more safe. That’s my sovereign right to choose!

If you’re convinced the vaccine is safe and effective, you can get it yourself.

Some of you are allowing fear and policies devoid of scientifically accurate data to destroy the country you live in and ruin your life.

We have a constitutional right to take risks. Life is full of bacteria and viruses, many of which spread before symptoms manifest and after they subside.

We have a sovereign right to receive OR refuse vaccines.

The data was inaccurate at best; purposely overblown to justify government overreaction at worst.

Stop allowing the government to destroy:

The food supply;

Small businesses;

Medical autonomy;

Access to healthcare;

Mass gatherings;

Privacy rights;

Our mental health & freedom

When the “new normal” is filled with starvation, depression, suicide, child abuse, domestic violence, imprisonment, governmental spying, and pure DESPERATION, the “virus” is going to look preferable to the world you helped facilitate.

I’m going to turn this around on people from now on. Those that say I’m (or anyone that supports this) putting money over lives by wanting the country back open for business…

Hear this:

-YOU don’t care about the people that will kill themselves out of hopelessness

-YOU don’t care about small businesses that’ll close their doors (THEIR LIVELIHOOD) permanently

-YOU don’t care about the children/women/men that’ll be victims of domestic abuse

-YOU don’t care about people defaulting on their mortgages

-YOU don’t care about bills going unpaid by families with ZERO income right now

-YOU don’t care about people wondering where their next meal will come from

-YOU don’t care about the people that’ll lose their sobriety and slip back into alcoholism

-YOU don’t care about the people that will starve

-YOU support the inevitable looting that’ll take place

-YOU don’t care about anyone that’s murdered the longer this shut down goes on

-YOU don’t care about people’s mental health

-YOU don’t care about the children that DO need teachers and educators to guild & educate them

-YOU don’t care about the economy crashing down around us

-YOU DON’T CARE.

-YOU love your shackles

-YOU are pathetic, begging your leaders for MORE shut down and MORE regulations and MORE handouts

I will NOT tolerate another person telling me that I don’t care about lives.

I care about the situation in its entirety.

But YOU don’t care about any of that so…

YOU stay home.

YOU wear a mask.

YOU live in fear.

I on the other hand will not. As is my sovereign right to choose NOT To!

Is the media the enemy of the American People?

An enemy media would undermine the government, publish its national security secrets, portray the people in the worst possible light and advocate policies meant to leave America poorer and weaker.

Is the media the enemy of the American people?

President Trump had referred to the New York Times, CNN and NBC News as “the enemy of the American people” shortly after taking office. At CPAC, soon afterward, he declared, “I called the fake news the enemy of the people, and they are — they are the enemy of the people.”

Trump’s comments inspired Washington Post and New York Times pieces comparing him to Stalin. Every marginal political figure looking for 15 seconds of slobbering media coverage, from Senator Jeff Flake to Khrushchev’s great-granddaughter, joined in with the silly Stalin analogies.

CBS and NBC vet Marvin Kalb wrote a book ponderously titled, “Enemy of the People: Trump’s War on the Press, the New McCarthyism, and the Threat to American Democracy.” Despite the media’s outrage at being called names, it’s not at all shy about calling the President all sorts of apocalyptic names.

“Mr. President, will you stop calling us the enemy of the people, sir? CNN’s Jim Acosta demanded during a recent tax anniversary reform event.

That’s not too likely.

In a USA Today poll, 34% of voters agreed that the media was the enemy of the people. Other polls also showed a sizable amount of agreement that the media was innately hostile to the American people.

Is the media really the enemy of the American people? Let’s tackle the question objectively.

Enemies hate you and want to destroy you. Do the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, CBS, and the whole alphabet soup of organizations with corporate headquarters in major cities really want to destroy the people who watch their programs, buy their papers and serve them soup after hours?

It seems implausible. But so did the Communists of the Khmer Rouge shooting everyone who wore glasses. Or North Korea’s multi-generational concentration camps, Nazi Germany diverting crucial resources from the war effort to kill Jews, or Venezuela shipping oil to Cuba while its people starve.

Plausibility is a poor measure of what fanatical ideologues might do. Let’s start with what they do, do.

While Jim Acosta was demanding a retraction for being called an “enemy of the people”, the media had thrown every effort into opening the border. The American people are defined by their physical possession of the territory. And that territory and its possession is defined and measured by a border.

You can’t advocate the destruction of the American people and then object to being called their enemy.

Without a border, there is no America and no American people. The territories formerly known as the United States fill up with various peoples who claim the entitlements of citizenship but not its responsibilities, whose identity is not of their current country of residency, but of their country of birth.

You don’t need to be an American to watch CNN, MSNBC or serve soup to one of their reporters. They would rather you weren’t. That’s what replacing Americans with cheap labor and cheap votes is about.

The media’s first allegiance is to the left. Not to America. Its people are not Americans. They’re leftists. The politics of the left are geared at replacing Americans with leftists through a combination of indoctrination, demographic replacement, economic warfare and voter suppression.

Destroying the American people would be an act worthy of an “enemy of the people”.

The media is offended by being referred to as the “enemy of the people”. But does it believe that the American people have the right to exist and maintain their existence? And if so, on what terms?

The media has opposed every war that against Communism or Islamism that the United States has fought. It has sought to undermine our country and our soldiers in these conflicts on various pretexts.

The media has covered up numerous acts of violence by Islamic terrorists. It has sided with Islamic terror networks such as the Muslim Brotherhood. It has urged our government to arm Islamic terrorists. It has supported Iran’s push for a nuclear bomb. It has spread disinformation about the links between Islamic terrorists and their domestic support networks. It has worked to silence law enforcement and intelligence officials who attempted to warn about the threat of Islamic terrorism.

If the Muslim Brotherhood controlled the media, would the news look any different than it does now?

This isn’t a shocking new development. The media repeatedly sided with Communist nations, guerrillas, spies, terrorists and superpowers against our own government. It covered up atrocities by the Soviet Union, glamorized Communist spies, urged that we arm and aid Communist nations, and undermined allied governments, and even our own government and its soldiers when they fought Communism.

There has never been a time in the last century when enemy propaganda wasn’t on the front pages of the major newspapers of America. After the fall of the USSR, the media traded the red for the green. Its collusion with the Islamic conspiracy is a sequel to its collusion with the Communist conspiracy.

Is this the behavior of an American institution or an enemy institution out to destroy America?

On the domestic stage, the media has repeatedly advocated for policies that have cost countless American lives and jobs. Its pro-crime advocacy has empowered gangs and thugs. Its economic programs have devastated cities, agricultural and industrial areas.

The media’s broadcasts claim that America is evil. It empowers the hateful voices of black nationalists and Islamist activists that want to destroy America. It calls for the eradication of the major historical figures. It cheers when Christopher Columbus and George Washington are removed from public places.

Any foreigner watching and reading the media comes away with the impression that America is a racist country whose institutions and populace are utterly despicable, and who have no right to exist.

If an actual foreign enemy were in charge of our news coverage, how different would it be?

There’s really not that much difference between how the media covers America, and how Al Jazeera, RT, Xinhau and other enemy state media cover America.

An enemy media would undermine the government, publish its national security secrets, portray the people in the worst possible light and advocate policies meant to leave America poorer and weaker.

How is that any different from what the New York Times and the Washington Post already do?

Godspeed Dragon

I reflect on the dreams and aspirations of that self-proclaimed nerd…

On October 4, 1957 Sputnik was launched at 10:29 p.m. Moscow time from the Tyuratam launch base in the Kazakh Republic. On the following day an eleven year old “nerd” heard the news and excitedly turned on the family floor model Philco multi-band radio to scan the short wave bands and hear the new baby moon go da-da-da.

On February 20, 1962, a fifteen year old high school junior was enthralled when John H. Glenn, Jr., became the first American to orbit Earth. An Atlas launch vehicle propelled a Mercury spacecraft into Earth orbit and enabled Glenn to circle Earth three times. It was the stuff teen-aged dreams were made of.

On July 20, 1969, a twenty-three year old married father of two was awestruck when Neil Armstrong became the first person to walk on the moon, a short six years before the martyred president John F. Kennedy has promised the world that we would go to the moon in a decade.
After many years the excitement and wonder of space travel tended to slip from pubic sight with the space shuttle becoming seemingly commonplace with the exception of the loss of the shuttle crew carrying Christa McCauliff.

Today, May 30, 2020, sixty-three years after Sputnik, the United States returned to launching American astronauts from American soil riding American rockets. As a seventy-four year old man I reflect on the dreams and aspirations of that self-proclaimed nerd and dare to hope that somewhere there is eleven year old excited and inspired to perhaps be a part of the American adventure to the stars and beyond.

Godspeed Dragon, may your flight be glorious and a beacon for the new generation of space dreamers.

Soft Civil War?

Donald Trump has caused the Shadow Government to come out of hiding: Professional government is a guild. Like medieval guilds. You can’t serve in it if you’re not a member. If you haven’t been indoctrinated into its arcane rituals. If you aren’t in the club.

This is a fascinating (and scary) read.  One of the best nutshell descriptions of our current political situation that I’ve seen.

Dr. Jack Devere Minzey, born 6 October 1928, died 8 April 2018, was the Department Head of Education at Eastern Michigan University as well as a prolific author of numerous books, most of which were on the topic of Education and the Government role therein. (Editor’s note) This was the last of his works:

Civil War:  How do civil wars happen?

By Dr. Jack Devere Minzey

Two or more sides disagree on who runs the country.  And they can’t settle the question through elections because they don’t even agree that elections are how you decide who’s in charge.  That’s the basic issue here  Who decides who runs the country? When you hate each other but accept the election results, you have a country.  When you stop accepting election results, you have a countdown to a civil war.

The Mueller investigation was about removing President Trump from office and overturning the results of an election.  We all know that. But it’s not the first time they’ve done this.  The first time a Republican president was elected this century, they said he didn’t really win.  The Supreme Court gave him the election.  There’s a pattern here

What do sure odds of the Democrats rejecting the next Republican president really mean?  It means they don’t accept the results of any election that they don’t win.  It means they don’t believe that transfers of power in this country are determined by elections. That’s a civil war.

There’s no shooting.  At least not unless you count the attempt to kill a bunch of Republicans at a charity baseball game practice.  But the Democrats have rejected our system of government.

This isn’t dissent.  It’s not disagreement.  You can hate the other party.  You can think they’re the worst thing that ever happened to the country.  But then you work harder to win the next election.  When you consistently reject the results of elections that you don’t win, what you want is a dictatorship.

Your very own dictatorship.

The only legitimate exercise of power in this country, according to Democrats, is its own.  Whenever Republicans exercise power, it’s inherently illegitimate The Democrats lost Congress.  They lost the White House.  So what did they do?  They began trying to run the country through Federal judges and bureaucrats.  Every time that a Federal judge issues an order saying that the President of the United States can’t scratch his own back without his say so, that’s the civil war.

Our system of government is based on the constitution, but that’s not the system that runs this country.  The Democrat’s system is that any part of government that it runs gets total and unlimited power over the country.

If the Democrats are in the White House, then the president can do anything  And I mean anything.  He can have his own amnesty for illegal aliens.  He can fine you for not having health insurance.  He can use the IRS as his own police force and imprison citizens who speak against him.  He can provide guns and money (Fast and Furious) (Iran nuclear deal) to other countries to support his own agenda, and watch while one of America’s Ambassador’s is dragged through the streets and murdered doing nothing to aid our citizens.  His power is unlimited.  He’s a dictator.  But when Republicans get into the White House, suddenly the President can’t do anything.  He isn’t even allowed to undo the illegal alien amnesty that his predecessor illegally invented.  A Democrat in the White House has ‘discretion’ to completely decide every aspect of immigration policy.  A Republican doesn’t even have the ‘discretion’ to reverse him.  That’s how the game is played.  That’s how our country is run. Sad but true, although the left hasn’t yet won that particular fight.

When a Democrat is in the White House, states aren’t even allowed to enforce immigration law.  But when a Republican is in the White House, states can create their own immigration laws.  Under Obama, a state wasn’t allowed to go to the bathroom without asking permission.  But under Trump, Jerry Brown can go around saying that California is an independent republic and sign treaties with other countries.  The Constitution has something to say about that.  Whether it’s Federal or State, Executive, Legislative or Judiciary, the left moves power around to run the country.  If it controls an institution, then that institution is suddenly the supreme power in the land.  This is what I call a moving dictatorship

Donald Trump has caused the Shadow Government to come out of hiding: Professional government is a guild.  Like medieval guilds.  You can’t serve in it if you’re not a member.  If you haven’t been indoctrinated into its arcane rituals.  If you aren’t in the club. And Trump isn’t in the club.  He brought in a bunch of people who aren’t in the club with him.

Now we’re seeing what the pros do when amateurs try to walk in on them.  They spy on them, they investigate them and they send them to jail.  They use the tools of power to bring them down.

That’s not a free country.

It’s not a free country when FBI agents who support Hillary take out an ‘insurance policy’ against Trump winning the election.  It’s not a free country when Obama officials engage in massive unmasking of the opposition.  It’s not a free country when the media responds to the other guy winning by trying to ban the conservative media that supported him from social media.  It’s not a free country when all of the above collude together to overturn an election because the guy who wasn’t supposed to win did.

Have no doubt, we’re in a civil war between conservative volunteer government and a leftist   socialist Democrat professional government.

Well now Pilgrims and Patriots, having read the above, I suggest two things:  forward this very timely, very important analysis to those whom you believe think like you do (and those that don’t) and ask them to read it.

“Let all sides be fairly heard.”

Fudging the numbers?

Last month, New York funeral home directors blew the whistle about inflated coronavirus death numbers. Death certificates mark “COVID-19” as the cause of death even when the deceased hadn’t tested positive for coronavirus, much less actually died of the virus.

Thinking for yourself is hard, that’s why the “Powers that be” want you to let the State and the media do it for you.

Last month, New York funeral home directors blew the whistle about inflated coronavirus death numbers. Death certificates mark “COVID-19” as the cause of death even when the deceased hadn’t tested positive for coronavirus, much less actually died of the virus. This week, a San Diego county supervisor suggested the numbers are even more inflated.

“We’ve unfortunately had six pure, solely coronavirus deaths — six out of 3.3 million people,” County Supervisor Jim Desmond said on the radio show Armstrong & Getty Extra Large Interviews., The San Diego Union-Tribune reported. San Diego County had reported roughly 190 deaths at the time — the current number is 200.

Desmond went on to criticize California’s lockdown. “I mean, what number are we trying to get to with those odds. I mean, it’s incredible. We want to be safe, and we can do it, but unfortunately, it’s more about control than getting the economy going again and keeping people safe,” he said.

In short, Desmond was suggesting that while COVID-19 may have contributed to the 190 deaths, most of those deaths were due in part to previous, unrelated health concerns.

Indeed, the disease has proven most deadly for people with underlying health conditions, so it stands to reason that “pure, solely coronavirus deaths” would be the minority — perhaps even just 3.2 percent of the total recorded deaths, as Desmond suggested.

As of Friday afternoon, there have been 87,218 deaths attributed to COVID-19 in the U.S. If Desmond’s claim is accurate and if that 3.2 percent rate holds across the country, and discounting the death certificate inflation, that would mean there are only 2,891 “pure, solely coronavirus deaths” in the U.S.

This is a rough estimate and it would be extremely difficult to confirm. Furthermore, there is little reason to dismiss a death when coronavirus has indeed contributed to it. If someone already had a serious case of asthma, got coronavirus, and died, it would be fair to say coronavirus contributed to the death.

However, the likelihood that “pure, solely coronavirus deaths” are so low does make a difference when analyzing the pandemic in terms of years of life lost, an important measurement. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) applies a principle that “the allocation of health resources must consider not only the number of deaths by cause but also by age.” Therefore, the CDC explains that the “years of potential life lost” is a useful figure — not because the lives of young people are more important than the lives of the elderly, but because humans can only delay death, not prevent it, and beause there is a difference between a disease that kills a 20-year-old in the prime of her life and one that kills a 90-year-old who would have otherwise died a month later.

Taking this figure, James Agresti and Andrew Glen at Just Facts compared the maximum years of life the lockdowns could possibly save and compared it to the years of life lost from the anxiety surrounding the pandemic, including lockdown anxiety. “The anxiety from reactions to Covid-19—such as business shutdowns, stay-at-home orders, media exaggerations, and legitimate concerns about the virus—will extinguish at least seven times more years of life than can possibly be saved by the lockdowns,” they concluded.

Since COVID-19 robs an average of 12 years of life from its victims, the lockdowns could save no more than 7.4 million years of life. Meanwhile, the anxiety and stress of the pandemic will cost 42.9 million Americans an average of 1.3 years of life, thus destroying 55.7 million years of life.

The coronavirus anxiety and stress cost at least 7.5 times more in terms of years of life than the lockdowns could possibly save, according to Just Facts.

If Jim Desmond is correct about the low rate of “pure, solely coronavirus deaths,” then COVID-19 may take even fewer years of life from its victims, thus bolstering the case against the lockdowns even further.

Americans would be wrong to only consider “pure, solely coronavirus deaths” in their analysis of the coronavirus pandemic. Even when COVID-19 only exacerbates a pre-existing condition and causes death that way, that death is tragic and rightly considered part of the pandemic. However, his claim raises two questions about reported deaths. If there are “pure” coronavirus deaths, are there “impure” ones? Did some people who tested positive for the virus nevertheless die of something else entirely?

There may be four types of recorded coronavirus deaths: (1) deaths only caused by COVID-19 (roughly 3 percent), (2) deaths in which COVID-19 ended the life of someone already struggling with health conditions, (3) deaths from other causes but after a patient had tested positive for the virus, and (4) deaths falsely marked “COVID-19” when there was not even a test. Deaths of type 1 and 2 are rightly considered coronavirus deaths, while deaths of type 3 are much harder to distinguish from type 2, and deaths of type 4 are completely inflating the numbers.

Americans cannot claim there have only been 2,891 deaths from the coronavirus pandemic, but they should be skeptical about the 87,218 number. The true number of coronavirus deaths is likely to be smaller.

Is the media the enemy of the American people?

If an actual foreign enemy were in charge of our news coverage, how different would it be?

President Trump had referred to the New York Times, CNN and NBC News as “the enemy of the American people” shortly after taking office. At CPAC, soon afterward, he declared, “I called the fake news the enemy of the people, and they are — they are the enemy of the people.”

Trump’s comments inspired Washington Post and New York Times pieces comparing him to Stalin. Every marginal political figure looking for 15 seconds of slobbering media coverage, from Senator Jeff Flake to Khrushchev’s great-granddaughter, joined in with the silly Stalin analogies.

CBS and NBC vet Marvin Kalb wrote a book ponderously titled, “Enemy of the People: Trump’s War on the Press, the New McCarthyism, and the Threat to American Democracy.” Despite the media’s outrage at being called names, it’s not at all shy about calling the President all sorts of apocalyptic names.

“Mr. President, will you stop calling us the enemy of the people, sir? CNN’s Jim Acosta demanded during a recent tax anniversary reform event.

That’s not too likely.

In a USA Today poll, 34% of voters agreed that the media was the enemy of the people. Other polls also showed a sizable amount of agreement that the media was innately hostile to the American people.

Is the media really the enemy of the American people? Let’s tackle the question objectively.

Enemies hate you and want to destroy you. Do the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, CBS, and the whole alphabet soup of organizations with corporate headquarters in major cities really want to destroy the people who watch their programs, buy their papers and serve them soup after hours?

It seems implausible. But so did the Communists of the Khmer Rouge shooting everyone who wore glasses. Or North Korea’s multi-generational concentration camps, Nazi Germany diverting crucial resources from the war effort to kill Jews, or Venezuela shipping oil to Cuba while its people starve.

Plausibility is a poor measure of what fanatical ideologues might do. Let’s start with what they do, do.

While Jim Acosta was demanding a retraction for being called an “enemy of the people”, the media had thrown every effort into opening the border. The American people are defined by their physical possession of the territory. And that territory and its possession is defined and measured by a border.

You can’t advocate the destruction of the American people and then object to being called their enemy.

Without a border, there is no America and no American people. The territories formerly known as the United States fill up with various peoples who claim the entitlements of citizenship but not its responsibilities, whose identity is not of their current country of residency, but of their country of birth.

You don’t need to be an American to watch CNN, MSNBC or serve soup to one of their reporters. They would rather you weren’t. That’s what replacing Americans with cheap labor and cheap votes is about.

The media’s first allegiance is to the left. Not to America. Its people are not Americans. They’re leftists. The politics of the left are geared at replacing Americans with leftists through a combination of indoctrination, demographic replacement, economic warfare and voter suppression.

Destroying the American people would be an act worthy of an “enemy of the people”.

The media is offended by being referred to as the “enemy of the people”. But does it believe that the American people have the right to exist and maintain their existence? And if so, on what terms?

The media has opposed every war that against Communism or Islamism that the United States has fought. It has sought to undermine our country and our soldiers in these conflicts on various pretexts.

The media has covered up numerous acts of violence by Islamic terrorists. It has sided with Islamic terror networks such as the Muslim Brotherhood. It has urged our government to arm Islamic terrorists. It has supported Iran’s push for a nuclear bomb. It has spread disinformation about the links between Islamic terrorists and their domestic support networks. It has worked to silence law enforcement and intelligence officials who attempted to warn about the threat of Islamic terrorism.

If the Muslim Brotherhood controlled the media, would the news look any different than it does now?

This isn’t a shocking new development. The media repeatedly sided with Communist nations, guerrillas, spies, terrorists and superpowers against our own government. It covered up atrocities by the Soviet Union, glamorized Communist spies, urged that we arm and aid Communist nations, and undermined allied governments, and even our own government and its soldiers when they fought Communism.

There has never been a time in the last century when enemy propaganda wasn’t on the front pages of the major newspapers of America. After the fall of the USSR, the media traded the red for the green. Its collusion with the Islamic conspiracy is a sequel to its collusion with the Communist conspiracy.

Is this the behavior of an American institution or an enemy institution out to destroy America?

On the domestic stage, the media has repeatedly advocated for policies that have cost countless American lives and jobs. Its pro-crime advocacy has empowered gangs and thugs. Its economic programs have devastated cities, agricultural and industrial areas.

The media’s broadcasts claim that America is evil. It empowers the hateful voices of black nationalists and Islamist activists that want to destroy America. It calls for the eradication of the major historical figures. It cheers when Christopher Columbus and George Washington are removed from public places.

Any foreigner watching and reading the media comes away with the impression that America is a racist country whose institutions and populace are utterly despicable, and who have no right to exist.

If an actual foreign enemy were in charge of our news coverage, how different would it be?

There’s really not that much difference between how the media covers America, and how Al Jazeera, RT, Xinhau and other enemy state media cover America.

An enemy media would undermine the government, publish its national security secrets, portray the people in the worst possible light and advocate policies meant to leave America poorer and weaker.

How is that any different from what the New York Times and the Washington Post already do?

We are in a silent/irregular war against an invisible enemy

How far does the government have to push before you’re jolted awake from your slumber?

Irregular warfare is far more varied than conventional conflict: hence the importance of an intellectual framework that is coherent enough to provide guidance, and flexible enough to adapt to circumstances.

American counterinsurgency practice rests on a number of assumptions:

-that the decisive effort is rarely military (although security is the essential prerequisite for success);

-that our efforts must be directed to the creation of local and national governmental structures that will serve their populations, and, over time, replace the efforts of foreign partners; that superior knowledge, and in particular, understanding of the ‘human terrain’ is essential;

-and that we must have the patience to persevere in what will necessarily prove long struggles.

Insurgency, however, can and will flourish in the modern environment.

The strains created by globalization, by the collapse of weak state structures, by demographic, environmental, and economic pressures, by the ease of cooperation among insurgent groups and criminals, and by the appearance of destructive radical ideologies, all augur a period in which free and moderate governance is at risk.

Insurgency is the organized use of subversion and violence to seize, nullify or challenge political control of a region.

As such, it is primarily a political struggle, in which both sides use armed force to create space for their political, economic and influence activities to be effective.

Insurgency is not always conducted by a single group with a centralized, military-style command structure, but may involve a complex matrix of different actors with various aims, loosely connected in dynamic and non-hierarchical networks.

To be successful, insurgencies require charismatic leadership, supporters, recruits, supplies, safe havens and funding (often from illicit activities).

They only need the active support of a few enabling individuals, but the passive acquiescence of a large proportion of the contested population will give a higher probability of success.

This is best achieved when the political cause of the insurgency has strong appeal, manipulating religious, tribal or local identity to exploit common societal grievances or needs.

Insurgents seek to gain control of populations through a combination of persuasion, subversion and coercion while using guerrilla tactics to offset the strengths of government security forces.

Their intent is usually to protract the struggle, exhaust the government and win sufficient popular support to force capitulation or political accommodation.

Consequently, insurgencies evolve through a series of stages, though the progression and outcome will be different in almost every case.

Reread the above “bolded” portion and think back over the past few months. A small number of well-placed experts have manipulated events in such a way as to completely disrupt normal life while convincing the majority of the population to voluntarily relinquish their livelihoods, social lives, family contacts… all in the name of safety and the “common good”.

You’ve somehow managed to convince yourselves that the people whose lives are affected by a virus are MUCH more important than the people whose lives are being destroyed (and in many cases, leading to death) by the effects of a worldwide economic shutdown and impending worldwide depression the likes of which no one has ever seen before.

At what point will you start QUESTIONING what’s going on? How far does the government have to push before you’re jolted awake from your slumber? How far are you willing to go with this?