Watch this 7-minutes of Democrats Demanding that the Police be Defunded.

We know that Biden, Harris, Schumer, Pelosi, Democrat governors and mayors, and the Democrat Party itself are all in with their “social justice myths” for the 2022 midterm and 2024 presidential elections.

The Defund the Police movement is the lynchpin holding up the Democrat Party’s social justice myth.

QUESTION: Why do they want to defund our police?

ANSWER: Because they can’t run on their record.

If you don’t believe us then watch this 7-minute video compilation in their own words demanding the defunding of all police,

We also know that while they are shouting from their roof tops and in the streets to “defund the police” they’re also increasing their own security details and use now weaponize police forces, like the DOJ, to attack their political opponents, e.g. the armed FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago and arrests of over 30 Trump supporters.

In a September 18th, 2022 article titled Equal Justice, They Called It American commentator, classicist, and military historian wrote,

We are now a revolutionary society in decline using the courts, prosecutors, the administrative state, and the law itself to punish enemies, help friends, and declare such asymmetry “social justice.”

What once distinguished the United States from illiberal regimes following the Orwellian mantra “some are more equal than others” was the hallowed American idea of “equal justice under the law.”

The phrase is engraved above the entrance to the United States Supreme Court—an ideal that took centuries to achieve. Yet it is an ancient concept—what the Greeks called isonomia that distinguished classical democratic Athens from its anti-democratic rivals. Isonomia later became enshrined as the central criterion of all Western consensual governments.

Does it still exist in Joe Biden’s America?

In many ways, no—due both to state and private vendettas as well as state efforts to destroy rather than merely defeat political opponents.

[ … ]

To incite the January 6 riot was prosecuted as a crime, but Kamala Harris, who was soon to be a vice-presidential candidate in the summer of 2020, could incite with impunity. Even more, she helped to raise bail for violent offenders during those riots and said of the summer-long “protests” shortly after the violent attempt to storm the White House grounds:

But they’re not going to stop. They’re not going to stop, and this is a movement, I’m telling you. They’re not going to stop, and everyone beware, because they’re not going to stop. They’re not going to stop before Election Day in November, and they’re not going to stop after Election Day Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they’re not going to let up—and they should not. And we should not.

What do those who had recently torched the historic St. John’s Episcopal Church take away from Harris’ adolescent greenlighting?

Read the full article.

Here are some tweets by Democrats on defunding the police:

The Bottom Line

I vividly remember watching a film in 1993 where the government weaponized its police, took away the right of their citizens to keep and bear arms and glorified mass murder it was titled Schindler’s List.

Fast forward to 2022 and we now understand that we have gradually left the ideal-idyllic principle of equal justice under the law and devolved into defining justice based solely on race, gender identity and political posturing.

Today those who embrace the words of the founder of the Democrat Party Thomas Jefferson as contained in the Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights and U.S. Constitution are deemed enemies of the state.

The idea that no-one is above the law has devolved into a myth in which the lawless are actually rewarded by never being brought to justice.

It now seems that justice is no longer blind folded but rather she is favoring some over others.

We now see the use of “social justice” and diversity, inclusion and equity as just catch words for a tyrannical do as I say or but not as I do police state.

Today some idolize and even worship convicted felons like George Floyd to show how justice is now based upon the color of one’s skin, not the content of one’s character.

Today one party lies, promotes myths and then denies what they have done. Rather than defend their policies they demonize their political opponents.

America is at a tipping point. We either are a nation of laws and law and order or we devolve into a dystopian state based upon the government’s definition of social justice.

In his novel 1984 George Orwell wrote, “If you want to picture the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face – forever.”

The metaphoric ‘stamping’ creates a strong violent image amongst the audience mimicking the brutality of the Stalinist regime. Today we are in the Biden Regime.

We have given you fair warning. Elections have consequences.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED TWEET:

FLORIDA: Lee County Republican Executive Committee Demands Special Session to bar WHO, the IRS & FBI

The below article describes Resolutions by the Lee County Republican Executive Committee (REC) to ban Dominion Voting Machines; restrict FBI and IRS actions against political enemies and criticizes the World Health Organization.

Seems like great Resolutions which should be considered by all of Florida’s RECs as well.

Lee Co. GOP demands Special Session to bar FBI and IRS, brands WHO as security threat

Lee County Republicans officially branded international health and economic groups as national security threats and demanded Florida restrict the IRS and FBI.

At a special meeting of the Lee County Republican Executive Committee (REC), members passed a series of resolutions related to hot-button issues.

That included passage of a resolution that criticized Dominion and ES&S voting machines and called for Florida to only allow paper ballots. Supporters of former President Donald Trump’s claims that the 2020 election was stolen have leveled accusations about the security and accuracy of Dominion voting machines, and activists in multiple states have sought to nix any technology from the company.

“The two systems currently approved are Dominion and ES&S, and numerous issues exist diminishing credibility of these companies who have failed to disclose their financials and ownership as private companies,” the Lee County GOP resolution reads.

It also calls on Gov. Ron DeSantis to use executive authority to prohibit the use of any electronic voting machines in the state.

Read the full article.

©Royal A. Brown III. All rights reserved.

154 Scientists at Los Alamos Nuke Lab Sold Military Secrets to China

A security firm called Strider Technologies published a report this week that said China paid leading scientists at America’s Los Alamos National Laboratory hefty sums of money to conduct research for the Chinese Communist government, including research with military applications that could threaten U.S. national security.

The report, titled The Los Alamos Club: How the People’s Republic of China Recruited Leading Scientists from Los Alamos National Laboratory to Advance its Military Programs, offered a rather straightforward answer to its titular question — China recruited those scientists by offering them up to a million dollars each, and at least 154 of them accepted.

Weren’t the Rosenbergs executed for this?

The Strider report is an extraordinarily detailed look at a problem that has been discussed at length in recent years, China’s extremely aggressive “talent recruitment” programs. The People’s Republic of China puts a great deal of effort into recruiting talented foreigners to serve its purposes, often without emigrating to China or leaving the positions they hold in free nations. Often, but not always, these recruitment programs target foreign citizens of Chinese heritage.

The most notorious of these initiatives is called the Thousand Talents Program (TTP). Many of the scientists in the Strider report were involved in TTP or its youth wing.

China’s recruitment activities often look a lot like espionage or technology theft, and sometimes participants are prosecuted for such, including employees of the Los Alamos National Laboratory. Other scientists and academics have been disciplined or fired by U.S. institutions for failing to disclose the full extent of their work for China. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) in April 2021 told a Senate committee that over 500 federally funded scientists were under investigation for possible links to China and other foreign powers. (Breitbart)

154 Scientists at Los Alamos Nuke Lab Defected to China

By Daniel Greenfield. September 24, 2022:

Defected of course implies that they ever worked for any nation other than China.

It’s a good thing that the Biden administration corruptly shut down the Trump administration’s attempt to stop Communist China from spying on us, manipulating us and robbing us blind to avoid offending anyone… like Beijing.

“We have heard concerns from the civil rights community that the “China Initiative” fueled a narrative of intolerance and bias. To many, that narrative suggests that the Justice Department treats people from China or of Chinese descent differently. The rise in anti-Asian hate crime and hate incidents only heightens these concerns.”

Goodbye China Initiative and U.S. National Security.

At least 154 Chinese scientists who worked on government-sponsored research at the U.S.’s foremost national security laboratory over the last two decades have been recruited to do scientific work in China — some of which helped advance military technology that threatens American national security — according to a new private intelligence report obtained by NBC News.

The report, by Strider Technologies, describes what it calls a systemic effort by the government of China to place Chinese scientists at Los Alamos National Laboratory, where nuclear weapons were first developed.

Many of the scientists were later lured back to China to help make advances in such technologies as deep-earth-penetrating warheads, hypersonic missiles, quiet submarines and drones, according to the report.

We are literally financing our own destruction in every possible way. It’s not surprising that Communist China would want to plant its own people at Los Alamos. The mindboggling thing is that they were able to plant over 150 of them. No waiting.

For instance, according to the report, Zhao Yusheng received nearly $20 million in U.S. taxpayer grants during an 18-year career at Los Alamos, where he held a top-secret Q clearance and led a defense project developing bombs that can penetrate deep underground.

Then, in 2016, Zhao joined a talent program, Strider found, and left the U.S. for a job at a research center in China. The report notes that before that, while he was at Los Alamos, he hired another Chinese scientist who worked with him on the bomb research. That scientist filed a patent in China in 2007 for an “ultra thick penetrating warhead,” according to the report.

Zhao is now a vice president at China’s Southern University of Science and Technology, known as SUStech, which conducts defense research. He did not respond to requests for comment.

The baffling question here is why we keep hiring people coming from an enemy state and then expected different results? What exactly are the qualifications for a secret Q clearance? An ability to wear pants? A solid grade point average? Technical ability with no regard to obvious issues? It used to be that people with family in enemy nations or even foreign nations had trouble getting security clearance. And that was over the top. But now all the barriers are gone.

“The correct number of Chinese or Russian citizens at our weapon labs should be zero,” said Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Ala., the ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee.

But that’s crazy talk. We need cheap foreign labor in our labs so we can be ripped off by our enemies.

“U.S. officials and experts say most Chinese scientists who immigrate to the U.S. remain here — and many have made significant contributions to U.S. defense technology.”

Except the tradeoff doesn’t seem to be worth if they go on to use what we know in the service of our leading enemy.

There’s a huge difference between Chinese immigrants opposed to the regime and those who are supportive or loyal to it. We used to make those distinctions with Russia, we threw them away with China. Does anyone even bother asking the folks with top clearance to denounce the regime? Or would that also be too offensive?

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

BRUTAL: Biden Crushing Iran’s Freedom Revolution Just Like Obama Did

Venezuela Empties Prisons and Sends Criminals To Biden’s Invasion US Border

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

How Trump’s 236 Endorsed Candidates Fared in the 2022 Primary Season

Candidates who were endorsed by President Trump compiled a record of 217 wins against 19 losses. No one could come close to matching that record. The Republican Party belongs to President Trump. President Trump is doing what he should have done in 2016. And that is purge the Republican Party of the RINOS, and replace them with pro-America candidates who can win. #Trump2024!

How Trump’s 236 endorsed candidates fared in the primary season

By Washington Examiner, September 15, 2022

Former President Donald Trump has loomed large over Republican primary races across the country, embracing a kingmaker role to steer the GOP’s trajectory with his coveted endorsement.

As the primary season came to a close Tuesday night, Trump finished strong, with about 92% of his preferred candidates crossing the finish line. None of his preferred candidates were on the ballot Tuesday, with the former president notably abstaining from the New Hampshire primary.

Read more.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Democrats Spend $53 Million To Help ‘MAGA Republicans’ Win Primaries

Ron DeSantis: ‘We rejected the elites, and we were right’

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Best NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) & Bringing the Border to You Videos of the Week

Democrats have embraced diversity, inclusion and equity except when it comes to taking illegal aliens and dropping them on their door steps. They want open borders for thee but not for them.

They virtue signal with their “sanctuary city” labels but when push comes to shove they show their true rich white supremacist colors.

While Biden, Harris and the Department of Homeland security “say” repeatedly that the border is secure they do nothing to make the border secure.

Here are some videos debunking the Democrats love for illegals, except not in their lily white Martha’s Vineyard communities.

When governors send them illegals they cry foul and begin name-calling.

Why, because they can’t defend what they are not and will not do—secure America’s borders.

WATCH:

TO KAMALA, WITH LOVE: Migrant Buses Drop Off Outside Veep’s D.C. Residence

Migrants Interviewed Outside Kamala Harris’ House Say ‘Border is Open’

AIR DeSANTIS: Florida Gov Sends Two Planes of Border Migrants to Martha’s Vineyard

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Ron DeSantis: ‘We rejected the elites, and we were right’

Mayorkas Secretly Met with Soros-Funded Groups During Border Trip to Address Migrant Crisis

Plundering Biden Moves To Open Up Public Benefits to 5+ Million Illegal Immigrants

WATCH: Illegal Migrant Buses Arrive At Kamala “The Border Is Secure” Harris’s Residence, “The border is open because we entered. It’s free.”

Reagan’s Goal to End the Department of Education Is Finally Gaining Momentum

Ending the Department of Education may seem like a radical idea, but it’s not as crazy as it sounds.


The debate over the federal role in education has been going on for decades. Some say the feds should have a relatively large role while others say it should be relatively small. But while most people believe there should be at least some federal oversight, some believe there should be none at all.

Rep. Thomas Massie is one of those who believes there should be no federal involvement in education, and he is actively working to make that a reality. In February 2021, he introduced H.R. 899, a bill that perfectly encapsulates his views on this issue. It consists of one sentence:

“This bill terminates the Department of Education on December 31, 2022.”

This position may seem radical, but Massie is not alone. The bill had 8 cosponsors when it was introduced and has been gaining support ever since. On Monday, Massie announced that Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.) decided to cosponsor the bill, bringing the total number of cosponsors to 18.

Though it may be tempting to think Massie and his supporters just don’t care about education, this is certainly not the case. If anything, they are pushing to end the federal Department of Education precisely because they care about educational outcomes. In their view, the Department is at best not helping and, at worst, may actually be part of the problem.

“Unelected bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. should not be in charge of our children’s intellectual and moral development,” said Massie when he initially introduced the bill. “States and local communities are best positioned to shape curricula that meet the needs of their students.”

Massie is echoing sentiments expressed by President Ronald Reagan in 1981, who advocated dismantling the Department of Education even though it had just begun operating in 1980.

“By eliminating the Department of Education less than 2 years after it was created,” said Reagan, “we cannot only reduce the budget but ensure that local needs and preferences, rather than the wishes of Washington, determine the education of our children.”

Before we rush into a decision like this, however, it’s important to consider the consequences. As G. K. Chesterton famously said, “don’t ever take a fence down until you know the reason it was put up.”

So, why was the federal Department of Education set up in the first place? What do they do with their $68 billion budget? Well, when it was initially established it was given 4 main roles, and these are the same roles it fulfills to this day. They are:

  • Establishing policies on federal financial aid for education, and distributing as well as monitoring those funds (which comprise roughly 8 percent of elementary and secondary education spending).
  • Collecting data on America’s schools and disseminating research.
  • Focusing national attention on key educational issues.
  • Prohibiting discrimination and ensuring equal access to education.

Now, some of these functions arguably shouldn’t exist at all. For instance, if you are opposed to federal funding or federal interference in education on principle, then there is no need for the first and fourth roles. As for the middle two roles, it’s clear that we need people collecting data, disseminating research, and pointing out educational issues. But the question here is not whether these initiatives should exist. The question is whether the federal government should pursue them.

On that question, there’s a good case to be made that leaving these tasks to the state and local level is far more appropriate. Education needs vary from student to student, so educational decisions need to be made as close to the individual student as possible. Federal organizations simply can’t account for the diverse array of educational contexts, which means their one-size-fits-all findings and recommendations will be poorly suited for many classrooms.

Teachers don’t need national administrators telling them how to do their job. They need the freedom and flexibility to tailor their approach to meet the needs of students. It is the local teachers, schools, and districts that know their students’ needs best, which is why they are best positioned to gather data, assess their options, and make decisions about how to meet those needs. Imposing top-down national ideas only gets in the way of these adaptive, customized, local processes.

The federal Department of Education has lofty goals when it comes to student success, but it is simply not the right institution for achieving them. If we really want to improve education, it’s going to require a bottom-up, decentralized approach. So rather than continuing to fund yet another federal bureaucracy, perhaps it’s time to let taxpayers keep their money, and let educators and parents pursue a better avenue for change.

This article was adapted from an issue of the FEE Daily email newsletter. Click here to sign up and get free-market news and analysis like this in your inbox every weekday.

AUTHOR

Patrick Carroll

Patrick Carroll has a degree in Chemical Engineering from the University of Waterloo and is an Editorial Fellow at the Foundation for Economic Education.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Freedom Is Essential For True Morality

And having a final end does not obviate the need for liberty.


What is the role of human freedom in morality? It’s a question I’ve been pondering and researching since graduate school.

C.S. Lewis once explained the different aspects of morality by using the metaphor of a flotilla. Every ship must be well run on its own, but each must also coordinate with all the others so that they avoid collisions and stay in formation. Finally, the fleet must be set on a destination, which constitutes the purpose of their journey. This is a helpful way to think about morality regarding self, others, and our ultimate end.

The personal aspect of morality—which might more properly be called ethics—is about the cultivation of virtue: the development of character traits so that choosing the good becomes a matter of habit.

An efficient and well-run ship is like a virtuous person: both have regularized the internal practices necessary to be a good example of what it is. There is one crucial difference, however: a ship’s crew is run hierarchically, under the command of a captain. But a person, in order to be truly virtuous, must be free to cultivate the virtues, or not.

There is no virtue in being temperate when you are being forced not to indulge. There is no virtue in being charitable when someone is forcing you to give up what is yours. Virtue can be guided by cultural traditions and social institutions, but it cannot be coerced. A virtuous man must also be a free man.

The interpersonal aspect of morality is more about rule following. These rules are important because, like the rules governing ships in a fleet, they prevent us from “colliding” with each other. They permit us to live together in harmony, and they also make us recognize, apart from the mere consequences to ourselves, the rights of others. Here too, liberty is essential.

When some people are permitted to dominate others, they treat others as merely a means to an end, rather than ends in themselves. Not only does this fail to honor the basic dignity within each person, it also stifles the flourishing of human potential and creativity. A society of domination will be a society that never reaches its full potential in the human sciences, physical sciences, and creative arts. Liberty affords us the greatest space possible to pursue our projects, in a way that enables us to live well with one another.

Finally, there is the question of ultimate ends. Why are we all here? Where are we going? This will necessarily be the most contentious since the idea of a final end for man often goes in tandem with a specifically religious view of man’s vocation. As a Christian, this is the position I hold.

But having a final end does not obviate the need for liberty. Freedom remains essential. To paraphrase Lord Acton, freedom is so precious that God will not override it, even when we badly misuse that freedom. In other words, we can’t get where we’re going if we’re not free to walk the road. I think this is a point on which religious, spiritual, agnostic, or even atheist persons can agree.

Thus, freedom is essential to a genuinely good human life at all the levels of morality. In my view, the classical liberal tradition remains the keeper of the flame of liberty, and I want to spend the rest of my career advancing classical liberalism as a research program. I look forward to sharing with you what I find.

Reprinted from Learn Liberty.

AUTHOR

Alexander William Salter

Alexander William Salter is an associate professor of economics in the Rawls College of Business at Texas Tech University, the Comparative Economics Research Fellow at TTU’s Free Market Institute, and a senior fellow with the American Institute for Economic Research’s Sound Money Project. Follow him on Twitter @alexwsalter.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Equal Justice, They Called It

Victor Davis Hanson writes for future historians so that they might understand how The United States of America went from a premise of ‘exceptionalism’ to ‘exceptional failure-ism’ otherwise known as ‘social justice’ and ‘equity’.

Equal Justice, They Said

We are now a revolutionary society in decline using the courts, prosecutors, the administrative state, and the law itself to punish enemies, help friends, and declare such asymmetry “social justice.”

By Victor Davis Hanson, September 18, 2022

What once distinguished the United States from illiberal regimes following the Orwellian mantra “some are more equal than others” was the hallowed American idea of “equal justice under the law.”

The phrase is engraved above the entrance to the United States Supreme Court—an ideal that took centuries to achieve. Yet it is an ancient concept—what the Greeks called isonomia that distinguished classical democratic Athens from its anti-democratic rivals. Isonomia later became enshrined as the central criterion of all Western consensual governments.

Does it still exist in Joe Biden’s America?

In many ways, no—due both to state and private vendettas as well as state efforts to destroy rather than merely defeat political opponents.

Is the law equally applied at the border?

Ask yourself whether you are more likely to be hounded by the federal government for not being vaccinated if you are a citizen in the U.S. military, or illegally violating federal immigration law as you storm the southern border?

Who needs a passport to leave and enter the United States—a citizen or an illegal alien?

If you nullify federal law and refuse to hand over a detained illegal alien to federal immigration agents, are you more or less likely to be prosecuted than someone who likewise deliberately seeks to nullify federal law by bulldozing on his property a nest of federally protected squirrels?

What tradition of Western jurisprudence allows violent criminals in America’s largest cities to be released upon booking?

What law states they are instantly free to commit more crimes without worry of incarceration or punishment, while those accused of illegally parading sit in jail for years awaiting charges?

Is it a greater crime in this republic to walk peacefully through an open door into the Capitol, as at least some who were charged as a result of January 6 did, or to beat to near death an innocent bystander as many do who are released after arrest?

As far as that reprehensible, buffoonish January 6 riot, compare the treatment accorded to those hundreds—many guilty of “illegally parading or “demonstrating in the Capitol”—with some 14,000 who were arrested in 120 days of rioting, looting, arson, assault, and murder during the spring and summer 2020 riots.

Did the FBI spend over a year tracking down the names of those known from videos who torched federal buildings, murdered those in the street, sought to storm the White House grounds, and set up no-go zones in downtowns?

To incite the January 6 riot was prosecuted as a crime, but Kamala Harris, who was soon to be a vice-presidential candidate in the summer of 2020, could incite with impunity. Even more, she helped to raise bail for violent offenders during those riots and said of the summer-long “protests” shortly after the violent attempt to storm the White House grounds:

But they’re not going to stop. They’re not going to stop, and this is a movement, I’m telling you. They’re not going to stop, and everyone beware, because they’re not going to stop. They’re not going to stop before Election Day in November, and they’re not going to stop after Election Day Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they’re not going to let up—and they should not. And we should not.

What do those who had recently torched the historic St. John’s Episcopal Church take away from Harris’ adolescent greenlighting?

After all, Harris essentially promised continued protests, which she knew had so often turned terribly violent and descended into death and destruction. Were her insurrectionary calls a crime or at least worthy of a cell phone grab? A leg iron? A squad of FBI vehicles swarming her car?

Is questioning an election outcome a crime? Or even taking steps to challenge the elections?

That is, did a John Eastman have the power of former Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and current January 6 committee chairman Benny Thompson (D-Miss.), who, with little or no evidence, took far more dramatic measures in 2004 to reject the Ohio electors and thus attempt to nullify that year’s presidential election results?

Did Stacey Abrams “undermine democracy” by touring the country denying she had been beaten in the Georgia gubernatorial election by some 50,000 votes? Did Hillary Clinton again undermine election integrity when she publicly urged Joe Biden not to concede the 2020 election if he lost the popular vote, or claim that Donald Trump was not the legitimate president of the United States?

Does Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice apply to some, none, or all retired high-ranking military officers?

What are we to make of retired lieutenant colonels who urged the military well before the 2020 election to remove Trump from office if they thought he questioned the election?

When generals and admirals called their commander-in chief a Mussolini-type character, a liar, like the Nazis, akin to the architects of Auschwitz, or wrote that the “sooner the better” he should be removed, were those violations to be prosecuted?

Did retired officers have their businesses or employers’ contracts with the Pentagon nullified?

Or was it only a more obscure retired officer, such as Lt. General Gary Volesky? He was a conservative who tweeted that the first lady (not the commander-in-chief) sounded hypocritical on the issue of abortion—and thus was fired as a Pentagon consultant. Was that equal administrative justice?
Report Ad

Is there really a Logan Act, the ossified 18th-century statute under which no one has ever successfully been prosecuted? It depends.

In 2016 James Comey’s FBI and the Justice Department interim head Sally Yates used that ruse as a pretext to set a perjury trap for National Security Advisor designate retired Gen. Michael Flynn. But did not former Secretary of State John Kerry meet stealthily with Iranian high officials during the Trump Administration to reassure them that the Iran Deal could be salvaged after the Trump tenure—a deliberate Logan Act subversion of his then government’s foreign policy?

Is it a crime to withhold presidential papers from the National Archives? Was that Donald Trump’s sin: that he did not more carefully and officially declare documents at his residence as unclassified or his own personal papers?

Was that a clumsy way of doing what George W. Bush did in 2001 when he simply issued an executive order allowing an ex-president or his heirs to veto release of presidential papers? Did FBI agents with guns enter one of the Obama mansions to discover why ownership of thousands of pages of his personal papers was still in dispute?

Did the FBI raid the home of the late Clinton-Administration National Security Advisor Sandy Berger to see whether he sought to hide or erase other documents, in addition to those he stole from the National Archives and destroyed? Was he ever frog-marched or put in leg irons?

What were minor celebrities and politicians trying to do in December 2016 when they cut commercials begging the electors not to follow their federally mandated roles in voting in accordance with their states’ popular votes? Were they pointing a “dagger at the heart of democracy”? Were they “insurrectionists”?

Conspiracy is a word that the Biden Administration reintroduced to the American discourse after a hiatus since the 1950s and 1960s. And the Left was eager to charge hundreds with conspiracy for storming the capitol or “colluding” with Russia to rig the 2016 election.

But Molly Bell in a 2021 Time essay proudly also used that word in the scariest sense in modern memory. She outlined how the Left, quietly with the DNC, unions, the anarchic left-wing street, and corporate help, all modulated the violent protests to ebb before the election and to be ready to flow again should Biden have lost.

She bragged how nearly $500 million of Silicon Valley dark money was funneled into key preselected precincts to essentially absorb the work of state and local registrars. She gushed how the Left conspired with Silicon Valley to monitor and censor any expressions and opinions on social media felt to be detrimental to the Biden campaign.

Did federal prosecutors pursue racketeering charges against any she named?

Speaking of “conspiracies,” was it legal for Hillary Clinton to hire a foreign national as a campaign helper to spread lies and dirt on her political opponent, even as she hid her role through the DNC, Perkins Coie law firm, and Fusion GPS? What did she have to hide?

Did James Comey’s FBI likewise conspire to interfere in an election by also hiring members of Clinton’s opposition hit team, specifically Christopher Steele and Igor Dyachenko, as FBI informants?

Was all that “democracy dying in darkness”?

That illegal effort to use the federal government to disrupt an election makes the clownish attempt of the Trump keystone cop team to question the electors look like child’s play. Will current National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan be pulled over driving home by an FBI fleet eager to seize his cell phone to ascertain fully his conspiratorial role in 2016 pushing the phony Trump Tower pings, Steele dossier, and collusion hoax to warp a federal election?

How about using equal justice in investigating supposed conspiracies and real violent demonstrations?

Did the FBI team, which monitored school kids’ parents to report back to Merrick Garland about their supposedly racist opposition to critical race theory, also ever monitor Twitter and Facebook to anticipate the next planned riot location of Antifa and BLM? Is it now investigating all the stolen money and diverted funds used for personal extravagance by BLM’s fraudulent leadership?

Donald Trump is continually audited for possible tax violations. Fine, but, given Hunter Biden’s laptop and the testimony of the Biden family co-grifters, has any Biden ever been under serious investigation for not reporting tens of millions of dollars in shake-down money, or gifting millions to Biden children?

How about lying under oath or to federal investigators? Are those activities still crimes?

Could a citizen swear under oath to IRS investigators, as James Comey did under oath to Congress on 245 occasions, that he did not know what was asked or could not remember?

In that context, what do ex-CIA head John Brennan, ex-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and ex-FBI interim director Andrew McCabe all have in common?

1) They all lied either under oath to Congress or to a federal investigator. 2) They all faced no criminal liability by committing such felonies. 3) Their animus and zeal in pursuing enemies were seen to be useful to the Left and thus they were rewarded by being hired as analysts at either MSNBC or CNN.

Is leaking or improperly possessing classified or confidential government information still a crime?

It seems that is one of the accusations against Donald Trump: that he had in his possession classified federal property that might have been insecure.

In contrast, was it a felony to leak to the media a rough draft of a confidential Supreme Court opinion—with the intent of helping to either undermine or change it? Was the unidentified, unprosecuted leaker a felon or a hero?

Were Trump’s boxes at home as insecure as the confidential, memorialized memos that James Comey wrote on FBI devices shortly after a confidential one-on-one conversation with the president of the United States, which he then deliberately leaked through a third party to the New York Times?

Was all that a conspiratorial gambit to fuel public pressure for a special prosecutor for the Russian collusion hoax? Was that not a clandestine effort that worked brilliantly in the appointment of his friend, former FBI Director Robert Mueller?

As special counsel, Mueller went on to waste 22 months and $40 million to prove that Russian collusion was a Clinton-FBI generated hoax as critics had insisted from the very outset of the appearance of the Steele dossier. Mueller was successful only in wounding an administration through the deliberate, daily leaked rumors that instantly became “walls are closing in” and “bombshell” media lies.

Is it a crime to threaten a Supreme Court justice?

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) did just that in front of the Supreme Court doors, when he riled up protestors by threats to individual justices:

I want to tell you Gorsuch. I want to tell you Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.

Had Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) done the same and warned both Justices Sotomayor and Kagan that the two “won’t know what hit you,” what would the Biden Administration have done?

It is a felony to mass at a justice’s home, and threaten his person, in attempts to warp a judicial ruling? Attorney General Merrick Garland saw no problems when a left-wing mob descended on the homes of Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. No one was arrested or indicted. No wonder an admitted would-be assassin later felt he could approach, with impunity, the Kavanaugh residence or that a mob could, with impunity, drive him out of a restaurant.

Again, would Garland have stood by had a MAGA crowd swarmed the home or the dinner table of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson? For that felony, most would likely still be sitting in jail awaiting charges.

Is it a crime to destroy subpoenaed property?

Currently, that is one of many unproved charges floated to justify the raid on the Trump home. If it is, Hillary Clinton destroyed thousands of subpoenaed and likely improper or illegal emails. She even ordered her assistant to destroy devices that might have risked leaving electronic prints of them.

The Mueller investigation’s FBI team simply shrugged that its phone data of its employees under federal subpoena were “mistakenly” wiped clean. Were any of these miscreants tried for defying a court order? For obstruction of justice?

In today’s America, it is a far greater sin to illegally parade at the nation’s Capitol than to burn down a federal courthouse in Portland.

A policeman who recklessly puts his knee on the neck of an ex-felon suspect, contributing to his death in custody, will be known to the nation in 24 hours as the most hated man in America and destined for a life behind bars. To add that the suspect was high on fentanyl and methamphetamines, violently resisting arrest, apprehended after committing a felony, striking officers, and in the past a convicted home invader who stuck a gun to the womb of a pregnant woman is irrelevant.

But not the same case is a Capitol policeman, with his own record of reckless conduct, who lethally shoots an unarmed female suspect and military veteran, for the misdemeanor crime of unlawfully entering through a window.

Unlike the former, the latter will not be immediately identified. His picture will not be splashed over the media. The results of the investigation into his conduct will instead be suppressed for months. And his critics will be smeared as racists. And the deceased? She will be slandered postmortem as a nut and pervert, while George Floyd was memorialized with a halo and angelic wings.

So, what has happened to blind Lady Justice?

The new Antifa/BLM/Squad/socialist Left filtered into government and absorbed the Biden Administration. It knows it lacks majority public support, so it has weaponized the justice system to punish enemies and ignore the crimes of allies—all to be excused by its morally superior ends that justify the use of such discreditable means. And the Left wishes to send a message to Americans: We are serious and mean business. So, join us, and receive indemnity from the federal government; oppose us and watch your back.

The result of all this is that America is not quite America anymore. We are now a revolutionary society in decline that uses the courts, prosecutors, the administrative state, and the law itself to punish enemies, help friends, and declare such asymmetry “social justice.” There is no equality under the law, but simply “some are more equal than others.”

AUTHOR

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

If Matt Walsh’s Reporting On Child Castration Is ‘Dangerous,’ What Is Biden’s ‘MAGA Extremism’ Rhetoric That Got A Teen Killed?

The Democrats are the party of murder, child castration and political oppression. Who would vote for these savages? This isn’t merely a political division. This is life and death. Perhaps a national divorce is the only peaceful resolution.

If Matt Walsh’s Reporting Is ‘Dangerous,’ What Is Biden-Backed ‘MAGA Extremism’ Rhetoric That Got A Teen Killed?

By: Elle Purnell, The Federalist, 

‘Matt Walsh is inciting a terror campaign against a hospital,’ one blue-checkmark raged on Twitter. ‘He will get people hurt or killed.’

Journalist Matt Walsh uncovered videos showing that Vanderbilt University Medical Center has been mutilating sex-confused kids and bragging about the profit margins of doing so since 2018, and some left-wingers came away with the impression that Vanderbilt, not the children it manipulated and maimed, was the victim. Accusing Walsh of “terrorism,” “harassment,” and “behaving dangerously,” they’re claiming Walsh is inciting violence against the medical center and are trying to shut down his reporting as a result.

But while a journalist publishing what the corporate media refuses to gets accused of stirring up hypothetical violence, an 18-year-old kid was just killed when he was run down by a man who said he thought the “teen was part of a Republican extremist group” — just weeks after the president of the United States ominously smeared “MAGA Republicans” as a “threat to the very soul of this country.”

Leftists weren’t wailing about “incitement to violence” then, and the national press almost universally ignored the slaying of 18-year-old Cayler Ellingson. They saved their outrage for Walsh, who merely published information, screenshots, and videos he’d obtained from Vanderbilt to reveal the medical center’s mutilation of minors’ healthy organs, the calloused financial incentives of which the center boasted, and the steps the center had taken to silence internal dissent.

Noah Berlatsky, a writer with bylines in The Washington Post and The Atlantic, flagged Walsh’s reporting for Twitter Support and accused the tech platform of being “complicit in terrorism” and potentially “murder” if it didn’t shut Walsh’s reporting down.

Leah Torres, an abortion center director who had her medical license suspended two years ago, said Walsh was “behaving dangerously” and “is going to get people hurt and/or killed.” She also claims to have reported the post, saying “that hardly feels like enough,” and tagging the FBI.

Alejandra Caraballo, an instructor at Harvard Law School, claimed without evidence that “Vanderbilt medical center has had to shift medical appointments for its trans clinic to virtual telehealth appointments as a result of threats being made.”

“Matt Walsh is inciting a terror campaign against a hospital and disrupting care,” she added. “He will get people hurt or killed.”

She also cited an equally slanted NBC News article that framed the topic this way: “Several children’s hospitals, most notably Boston Children’s, have been the targets of a far-right harassment campaign for months, led by anti-trans influencers with millions of collective followers who have spread misinformation about the hospitals’ gender-affirming treatment for minors.” NBC failed to say what part of the reporting on hospitals’ abuse of minors was “misinformation.”

Self-described “woke social justice warrior” Zack Hunt, another Twitter user to flag Walsh for the FBI, accused Walsh of being a “terrorist” and running a “terrorist campaign,” and called for a stop to his supposed “efforts to terrorize our city before he incite[s] more threats of violence.”

Keep reading….

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden Blasted by Doocy and Rivera Over Silence on Republican Teen’s Murder

POLITICAL MURDER: Democrat Who Murdered Teen Acted On Biden’s ‘Republican Extremism’ Rhetoric, Cited It To Justify His Act

Biden Regime Pressuring FBI to Fabricate ‘Extremist’ and ‘White Supremacist’ Cases, Agents Say: Report

Jew-Hater Rashida Tlaib: You can’t hold “progressive values” and support the Jewish state

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Pennsylvania County Sues Dominion Voting Systems for ‘Unauthorized Python Script’ & ‘Foreign IP Address’

The wheels of justice grind exceedingly slow, but they grind exceedingly fine.

We. Will. Get. There.

Pennsylvania County Sues Dominion Voting Systems for ‘Unauthorized Python Script’ & ‘Foreign IP Address’

Fulton County, Pennsylvania filed a lawsuit against Dominion Voting Systems this morning for a “breach of contract”.

By: Kanekoa The Great, September 21, 202:

The county says that it became “aware of severe anomalies” with Dominion Voting Systems during the 2020 election after it was unable to reconcile “voter data with votes actually cast and counted”.

An investigation by Wake Technology Services of West Chester, Pa. into the machines at the county’s request in February 2021 found numerous significant issues with the machines.

These included ballot scanning errors and non-certified database tools installed on the system.

Speckin Forensics Laboratories based out of Lansing, Michigan, was retained to acquire forensic images of six hard drives in Fulton County, Pennsylvania on July 13-14, 2022.

The private forensics firm, whose “examiners have presented testimony in over 30 states”, produced a county commissioned a report on September 15, 2022, which revealed “several deficiencies” that directly contradict the “contractual terms and conditions” provided to Fulton County by Dominion Voting Systems.

The report alleges that Fulton County’s log files show “an external IP address” located in Quebec, Canada, and that an unauthorized “python script” had been installed after the certification date.

Moreover, the system’s security patch had not been updated since April 10, 2019, and default usernames and passwords had not been changed since the time of installation.

The report says, “This python script can exploit and create any number of vulnerabilities including, external access to the system, data export of the tabulations, or introduction of other metrics not part of or allowed by the certification process.”

What’s more, an “external IP address that is associated with Canada” was found on the very same adjudication workstation that contained the “post certification python script”.

Read the lawsuit and report.

AUTHOR

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

RUNNING FOR THEIR LIVES: Nearly 42 Thousand New Yorkers Abandon State for Florida

Fleeing slave states to free states.

Residents have developed a distaste for the Big Apple. New York Post: A record-breaking number of Empire State residents switched their driver’s licenses to the Sunshine State version last month, according to a Post analysis of Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles data. A total of 5,838 New Yorkers made the switch in August — the highest recorded number for a single month in history, the numbers show. Year to date, 41,885 New Yorkers have handed over their licenses after moving south, a torrid pace that’s pointing to a new annual record (New York Post). Daily Wire: The New York exodus began when people left the heavily-restricted state during the pandemic to live in the Republican-led Florida that had lifted COVID restrictions, but rising crime rates in New York also seem to play a factor in people’s decision to leave (Daily Wire).

HOW RED STATES CAN SAVE THE AMERICAN REPUBLIC FROM SELF-DESTRUCTION

How can a state break free from federal management that is detrimental to its citizenry?

Every part of our country does not have to go down with the larger ship. A state, or group of states, could choose to remove itself from federal processes. By that, I am not recommending secession from the union, but deciding to forego all federal monies and thereby reject the federal control that comes with federal funds.

A change in taxation would be essential, of course. The state or states involved would collect federal income tax from their citizens. The citizens would pay federal taxes for only those federal services they continue to use.

So, they would pay taxes to support the military, international relations, debt retirement, etc. They would not make contributions to Social Security, welfare, food stamps, Medicare or Medicaid, the U.S. Department of Education, or any of the other social or regulatory federal programs.

If taking this path, the states must assume responsibility for those federal programs important to their citizenry. So, obviously, state taxes would increase on some level, while federal taxes would decrease dramatically.

The Only Way Out of the March to Socialism

The states would gain, of course, control over those social and regulatory programs they choose to bring under state management, and they can discontinue as many programs as their voters desire to stop paying for. This can accurately be viewed as a return to the self-government and federalist structure on which the country was founded, and restore systems of operation that are far healthier than the current arrangement.

Removal from federal programming is the only alternative to the ever-increasing reach of the federal government. If a state or states can make the numbers work, this approach could result in saving the republic. Thus, states choosing to remove resources from the federal government may be the best hope for the survival of the republic.

At the very least, this would provide the option of living in this country outside the constant reach of an all-powerful federal system. Personal responsibility and liberty would be the hallmark of those states. That seems to me a great place to live — kind of like the entire United States of America was just a few decades ago.

Keep reading…..

AUTHOR

REALTED VIDEO: President Donald J. Trump’s Save America Rally in Wilmington, North Carolina

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Massachusetts Activates 125 National Guardsmen To Support 50 Illegal Migrants In Martha’s Vineyard

Migrants Say They Weren’t Tricked Into Coming To DC

Massachusetts is activating 125 national guardsmen to help transport the 50 illegal immigrants who recently arrived at the island of Martha’s Vineyard late Wednesday off the island, Republican Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker announced Friday.

Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis sent the migrants to Martha’s Vineyard on Wednesday as part of the state’s program transporting illegal migrants to sanctuary cities. Massachusetts is now activating its national guard and offering to transport the migrants to Joint Base Cape Cod, Baker announced.

The Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) is coordinating with state and local officials to provide food and shelter, according to CBS. Baker said locals had provided temporary shelter to the migrants but were unable to help them long-term.

“The island communities are not equipped to provide sustainable accommodation, and state officials developed a plan to deliver a comprehensive humanitarian response,” he said, according to CBS.

The move to the military base will be voluntary, according to Baker, who noted that Joint Base Cape Cod has previously housed people fleeing Hurricane Katrina and served as a medical site during for COVID-19. It will now offer food and shelter, healthcare and legal services to the 50 migrants, according to Baker.

The rate of illegal immigration through the southern border has shattered records throughout the Biden administration, with nearly 2 million individuals encountered by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) between October 2021 and July 2022.

AUTHOR

LAUREL DUGGAN

Social issues and culture reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden’s Neighbors Applaud Texas on Migrant Moves

Humanitarian Crisis’: Martha’s Vineyard Scrambles To Support 50 Illegal Migrants Sent By DeSantis

GOPUSA: Previously Deported Illegal Alien Kills Florida Deputy

Soros-Backed Immigration Group Suing DeSantis Over Martha’s Vineyard Flights Called To ‘Defund’ Border Patrol, ICE

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

VIDEO: ‘It is absurd to remove crucifixes from our classrooms, while entire neighborhoods have been taken over by sharia’

Italian politician Giorgia Meloni: “I don’t believe we ought to hide our identity, in order to respect others. Which is what leftists believe. It is paradoxical to remove crucifixes from our classrooms, while accepting that entire European neighborhoods have been taken over by Islamic sharia. I don’t get it, honestly.”

Thanks to RAIR.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Azerbaijani soldiers stab, rape, and dismember female Armenian soldier, video their crimes

Iranian dissidents and former hostages sue Raisi for torture as Biden’s handlers give him visa

UK: Muslim screaming ‘Allahu akbar’ stabs two police officers, one of them three times in the neck

UK: Muslims attack Hindu temple in Leicester

Pakistan: Muslim shaves his wife’s head over suspected affair

Afghanistan: Taliban lure woman from home under guise of distributing aid, shoot her dead

Hamas-Linked CAIR Tries Michigan Mosque Controversy Before the TV Cameras

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Soros Propaganda Org. Offers TikTok Influencer $400 To Create Video To Spread Anti-Trump Lies

“I’m not a Trump supporter,”  said Attorney and TikToker @TrialByPreston as he revealed in a video that the Soros-funded Good Information Foundation attempted to pay him to spread lies and misinformation about President Trump, and his 2020 presidential campaign.

“I was just offered $400 to make an anti-Donald Trump propaganda post related to the January 6 investigation that is completely not true,” Preston Moore, Esq. said in the video. The Good Information Foundation, headed by Rick Stengel, Former Under Secretary of State in Obama administration, emphasizes that “America is in an information crisis,” and that “disinformation is threatening public health, safety, social trust and democracy.”

Moore emphasized that he’s not a Trump supporter to “give a little bit of context,” and noted that he’s an attorney who posts legal news on TikTok. Other videos on his channel include discussions of the special master that was appointed to review documents seized by the FBI from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home, on the Parkland school shooter, on the Constitution, or other matters.

Then he launched into what happened, saying: “I get an email from somebody at the Good Information Foundation.” That person, he said, obscuring the name, “sent me a message letting me know she represented the Good Information Foundation and that she was willing to offer a paid collaboration to discuss some topics related to January 6.

Watch this.

Here is the press release for this mockingly named,  “Good Info”:

A new public benefit corporation backed by billionaires Reid Hoffman, George Soros, and others is launching Tuesday to fund new media companies and efforts that tackle disinformation.

Why it matters: Good Information Inc. aims to fund and scale businesses that cut through echo chambers with fact-based information. As part of its mission, it plans to invest in local news companies.

The group will be led by Tara McGowan, a former Democratic strategist who previously ran a progressive non-profit called ACRONYM.

  • ACRONYM invested in for-profit companies that built media and technology solutions for progressive causes. It ran one of the largest digital campaigns to defeat President Trump in the 2020 election, totaling $100 million.
  • Good Information Inc. will invest in new businesses and solutions that tackle the disinformation crisis. That could mean funding new or existing companies that boost news from existing news outlets.

The company’s advisory committee consists of nearly two dozen political, media and tech experts, including former White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer, Civic Signal Founder Eli Pariser, Check My Ads co-founder Nandini Jammi, former Chicago Tribune and Chicago Sun-Times editor Mark Jacob, Accountable Tech co-founder Nicole Gill and others.

Influencer says he was offered money to spread anti-Trump Jan 6 lies on TikTok, brings receipts

“I was just offered $400 to make an anti-Donald Trump propaganda post related to the January 6 investigation that is completely not true,” Preston Moore, Esq. said in the video.

By: Post Millennial, September 18, 2022:

Influencer says he was offered money to spread anti-Trump Jan 6 lies on TikTok, brings receipts

Attorney and TikToker @TrialByPreston revealed in a video that the Good Information Foundation attempted to pay him $400 to spread unsubstantiated rumours and misinformation about January 6, President Trump, and his 2020 presidential campaign.

“I was just offered $400 to make an anti-Donald Trump propaganda post related to the January 6 investigation that is completely not true,” Preston Moore, Esq. said in the video. The Good Information Foundation, headed by Rick Stengel, Former Under Secretary of State in Obama administration, emphasizes that “America is in an information crisis,” and that “disinformation is threatening public health, safety, social trust and democracy.”

Moore emphasized that he’s not a Trump supporter to “give a little bit of context,” and noted that he’s an attorney who posts legal news on TikTok. Other videos on his channel include discussions of the special master that was appointed to review documents seized by the FBI from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home, on the Parkland school shooter, on the Constitution, or other matters.

Then he launched into what happened, saying: “I get an email from somebody at the Good Information Foundation.” That person, he said, obscuring the name, “sent me a message letting me know she represented the Good Information Foundation and that she was willing to offer a paid collaboration to discuss some topics related to January 6.

“I said ‘sure, why not,’ I’ll learn some more,” he said. He learned that the Good Information Foundation would pay him $400 to make a post on his page and share it to Instagram, and that there were specific bullet points that they’d like him to hit to earn that fee.

The Good Information Foundation allegedly sent him “Important Notes” as to what to say in the video.

“Say ‘criminal conspiracy’, not ‘attempted coup,’ ‘treason’ or ‘insurrection’.

“Say ‘Trump Republicans’, not ‘Trump and his allies.’

“Say ‘January 6 investigation’, not ‘hearing’ or ‘trial.’

“Call this an ‘attack on our country’ or an attack on ‘America’ or on ‘Americans’ and a ‘criminal conspiracy,’ ‘committed crime.’

“Talk about ‘MAGA Republicans’ etc.

“Make clear this is ongoing and unresolved, not past and done.

“Show voter agency, turn the anger into defense.

The correspondence asked additionally for “key messaging,” including to “Remind your followers about the images and scenes from the January 6th insurrection.” The Good Information Foundation gave an example of what should be said as regards this, suggesting “Example: ‘You probably saw this [greenscreen of Jan 6th violence] happen but what a lot of people don’t know is that the violence on January 6 was actually planned and paid for by Trump Republicans.’”

“Talk about the many aspects of their plan and the broad involvement of Trump officials, members of Congress [redacted]…” The Good Information Foundation suggests the example “The Trump campaign paid literally millions of dollars to make January 6th happen.”

They also suggest that Moore say “It’s important to know that this wasn’t a one day thing—there is an ongoing threat of political violence or MAGA Republicans trying to overturn elections.” He is also meant to emphasize the ongoing hearings of the January 6 Committee, with more coming up in September.

“And most importantly,” Moore said, the Good Information Foundatiuon said that he “must channel all of this on to the manipulation of voter agencies so that I could turn their anger around this event into defiance that would make people more likely to vote in midterms.”

Moore pushed back against the Good Information Project, asking his contact “what is the basis for the claim that the Trump campaign itself paid millions of dollars to make the January 6 seat at the Capitol happen?”

The Good Information Foundation didn’t answer that question, instead saying that he didn’t have to say that if he didn’t want to. It’s evident, however, that the Good Info Foundation hasn’t just asked one TikTok lawyer to engage in this kind of video-making, but that this is a concerted effort to push false information onto the American public via social media influencers.

“Let me know if you are interested and the rate works for you,” the contact wrote to Moore.

For his part, Moore was not interested. He noted that “They boast on their homepage that good information is the lifeblood of a democracy.”

Indeed, they do. The Good Information Foundation, an IRS designated not-for-profit charitable organization, engages in what they call The Civic News Initiative, which is likely what their reach out to Moore was in support of. “Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office,” the IRS specifies.

“The Good Information Foundation will build a network of local freelance editors, reporters, content producers and community organizers,” they write, “committed to producing and distributing factual, value-driven news and content to the communities in which they live. The Good Information Foundation will compensate them to publish their original reporting online and offer the content free of charge to any global, national, state or local news organizations looking to bolster their reporting capacity and coverage within those communities and geographies.”

Additionally, they claim as their mission that they intend “to increase the flow of good, factual information online to counter and rebut the spread of misinformation and disinformation. We do this by creating, incubating, funding and lifting up fact-based solutions, voices, programs and initiatives that can be quickly developed, tested and deployed at scale. We are on offense against disinformation.”

Despite the communciation sent to Moore about spreading unsubstantiated misinformation— for a fee— the Good Information Foundation states they they “Develop and deliver factual, relevant and local information to specific populations who live in news deserts, are under-reached by trusted news organizations, and who are vulnerable to being reached with bad information; Develop training programs and curriculum for young journalists, content creators and organizers committed to building a better internet and fact-based media ecosystem; Produce new research, case studies and thought leadership that identify, measure and elevate new solutions to countering and diluting the effects of disinformation on vulnerable communities.

“Develop civic education, training and communication programs that help increase informed civic participation among lower-voting and non-voting communities.

“Provide direct support to mission-aligned organizations and individuals working at the forefront of the information crisis to scale tested efforts to increase the flow of good information online.” They continue to say that they are “committed to restoring social trust and strengthening democracy by investing in solutions that counter disinformation and increase the flow of good information online.”

AUTHOR

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump Vows to Fight Back Against Political Persecution During HUGE Ohio Rally

DeSantis SHATTERS All-Time Fundraising Record, Gives Money To Republican Candidates

Federal Court Against Big Tech, Social Media Companies Do Not Have ‘Right’ To Censor’

Economic Freedom Plummets in the US During Biden Rule, New Ranking Shows

New Orleans Becomes Murder Capital of America, Overtaking St. Louis

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Economic Freedom Plummets in the U.S. During Biden Rule, New Ranking Shows

Economic freedom in the U.S. drops to its lowest point in four decades.

The Democrats hate you and wish to destroy every good thing, every joy this fine country had to offer. The daily social fabric of our lives is disintegrating at whiplash-inducing speed.

Get out and vote in November. We must overwhelm the tallies to thwart these election fraud criminals.

Economic freedom in the US has declined significantly, new ranking shows

By: Eric Cervone, The Blaze, September 18, 2022:

The United States is significantly less free economically than it was a year ago, according to the Canada-based think tank Fraser Institute.

Each year, the Fraser Institute releases a report entitled “Economic Freedom of the World,” a ranking of countries around the world by economic freedom. This year’s ranking uses data from 2020 to order countries from most free to least free. The ranking is calculated using numerous factors, including size of government, respect for property rights, freedom to trade, monetary policy, and regulation.

“When you talk about economic freedom, you’re talking about people being free to trade with others, compete in markets, and keep what they earn,” said Florida State University economics professor James Gwartney, who co-authored the report. “Economic freedom is about people being free to mold and shape their own lives.”

The United States slots in at 7th place, down one spot from last year. But the U.S.’s score dropped more significantly, down from 8.25 to 7.97 on the index’s 10-point scale. The reason why America lost only one spot in the rankings is because economic freedom around the world fell in 2020, according to the Fraser Institute. The report shows that the average economic freedom rating fell to 6.84 in 2020, down from 7.00 in 2019, “erasing about a decade’s worth of improvement in economic freedom in the world,” the report states. However, average economic freedom is still up compared to 2000.

Keep reading….

AUTHOR

RELATED VIDEO: Biden’s America has gone to crap (literally)

RELATED ARTICLES:

This week in Bidenomics: Buckle up for a hard landing

New Orleans Becomes Murder Capital of America, Overtaking St. Louis

Federal Court Against Big Tech, Social Media Companies Do Not Have ‘Right’ To Censor’

Fox Appointed As Henhouse Guard: City University of New York Tabs Anti-Semite to Investigate Anti-Semitism

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.