Baby Sex Education

This is pedophilia.

Pull your kids from government schools.

United States Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra Defends Trans Surgeries For Kids.


Pride Fest ‘Kiddie Korner’ Includes ‘Affirming Books,’ ‘Lots Of Crafts,’ And ‘Drag Kids Dress-Up’

More articles on public schools sexually grooming underaged students.

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

New Mexico Audit Identifies Feature in Dominion Voting Machines that Allows Ballots to be Filled Out by Machine Itself

On Monday, the Otero County Commission held a special meeting on the 2020 election audit sanctioned by the County exposing shocking results from the 2020 election. The auditors  ound a feature within Dominion machines that would allow ballots to be filled out by the machine itself. They also found material issues with the voter rolls in the county. Furthermore, all of the ballot images from the 2020 Election were deleted and this occurred after Dominion worked on the voting machines in the county in June 2021.The Pinion Post is reporting that all of the ballot images disappeared from the machines after Dominion worked on them in June of 2021. Those images must be saved for over a year.

One commenter: “Dominion is an international criminal organization whose purpose is to deliver a result to those who pay for it.”

New Mexico Audit Identifies Feature in Dominion Voting Machines that Allows Ballots to be Filled Out by Machine Itself

By Joe Hoft, Gateway Pundit, May 10, 2022:

On Monday night in Alamogordo, Otero County, New Mexico, individuals involved in a 2020 Election audit presented results from their audit to date. They identified a number of issues and some very shocking issues as well.

The auditors found material issues with the voter rolls in the county.

The Pinion Post reported that per the auditors, all of the ballot images from the 2020 Election were deleted and this occurred after Dominion worked on the voting machines in the county in June 2021.

These Dominion errors come after the county auditors reported last week that the Dominion voting machines had an erroneous code in them that would force ballots to move to adjudication where the selections on the ballots are manually determined.

The Pinion Post reports:

Erin Clements was joined by her husband, David Clements, and expert witness Jeffrey Landberg, who was involved in finding apparent fraudulent activity in Antrim County, Michigan, during the 2020 election. Landberg has been helping with the data side of the audit after Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai of EchoMail, Inc. was intimidated out of participating in the audit by “threats from up high” from Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives.

David Clements opened up his testimony on the apparent fraud by saying, “We’re told that the Lord abhors inaccurate weights and measures. What we’re finding is inaccuracy after inaccuracy after inaccuracy.” He added, “You have a potential crime scene in Otero County.
Clements said, “It appears you’re being held at gunpoint.” He said the County is a casualty of “lawfare” from “Congress and a bunch of operatives.”

Landberg echoed David Clements’ sentiments, saying, “If you even question election integrity, you get canceled.”

There were project files missing for the 2020 election in Otero County, according to Landberg. The voting machine company, Dominion Voting Systems, came out to “service” the units in June 2021, according to Otero County Clerk Robyn Holmes. Landberg concluded that Dominion “definitely had the possibility of erasing stuff.”

Landberg also noted how models of Dominion machines in Otero County had the capabilities of remote access from outside sources. He said manufacturers, such as Dominion “have led people to believe they don’t have that capability.” But they do have this capability, according to evidence provided by the Clements.

Landberg also noted that the Otero County audit found a feature within Dominion machines that would allow ballots to be filled out by the machine itself.

The audit team will present their work from their review of ballot images at a later date.

Every day we learn something new about the 2020 Election. Every single day. 

Read the rest.….




EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Follow Pamela Geller on Trump’s social media platform, Truth Social.

LISTEN: Audio Of Lindsey Graham Saying Biden Is ‘Best Person’ To Lead The Country

Our party has been so deeply betrayed by these craven quislings. The loyalists, the true Americans, must purge these treacherous dogs from our ranks.

LISTEN: Audio Of Lindsey Graham Saying Biden Is ‘Best Person’ To Lead The Country After January 6

By Rusty Weiss 

Audio has surfaced of Senator Lindsey Graham suggesting Joe Biden was the “best person” to lead the country after the January 6th riot at the Capitol.

The news comes from another audiotape released by New York Times reporters Jonathan Martin and Alexander Burns for their new book titled, “This Will Not Pass.”

Graham’s comments suggest those in attendance at the Capitol that day do not represent the Republican Party and that Biden would unify the nation and make us stronger. That didn’t exactly pan out.

“We will actually come out of this thing stronger. Moments like this reset. It’ll take a while. People will calm down,” Graham (R-SC) can be heard remarking.

“People will [say] ‘I don’t want to be associated with that.’ This is a group within a group,” he added.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Follow Pamela Geller on Trump’s social media platform, Truth Social.

Biden Blames Putin, COVID, and ‘Ultra MAGA’ GOP For Biden Inflation — NOT Himself

“Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it.” ― Joseph Goebbels, Minister of Propaganda, Nazi Germany

Naturally President Biden blamed Trump, Putin, and COVID for inflation. When President Trump was in office inflation was 1.4 percent. Biden came into office and viciously attacked the American energy industry, while spending trillions of dollars to pay people not to work. Once again, the Biden Administration is a dangerous joke. Every decent and rational American must vote the Democrats out of office in 2022 and 2024.

Another depraved display of the Democrats’ contempt for the American people.

Biden Blames Putin, COVID, and ‘Ultra MAGA’ GOP Addressing Inflation — NOT Himself

By Todd Starnes, May 10, 2022

President Joe Biden, under pressure to tame high inflation, sought to assure Americans on Tuesday that he understands what they are grappling with and that the Federal Reserve is working to resolve the top issue weighing on his administration.

At the same time, the Democrat went on the offensive, attacking the Republican agenda. He slammed what he called “the ultra-MAGA plan put forward by congressional Republicans to raise taxes on working families, lower the income of American workers, threaten the sacred programs Americans count on like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, and give break after break to big corporations and billionaires just like they did the last time they were in power.”


Biden Cancels More Oil And Gas Leases As Fuel Prices Skyrocket

Biden Refers To Inflation As Our ‘Strength’

Green Beret PAC launched to expose ‘how President Biden has failed to defend our interests time and time again.’ 

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

Quick note: We cannot do this without your support. Fact. Our work is made possible by you and only you. We receive no grants, government handouts, or major funding.

Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s essential NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow Pamela Geller on Gettr. I am there. click here.

Follow Pamela Geller on Trump’s social media platform, Truth Social. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

NYT Explores What Happens When Democrats Have All the Power. The Answer May Surprise You

It turns out voters and lawmakers in progressive states arrive at decisions like everyone else: on self-interest. But that’s not all.

Last week New York Times video journalist Johnny Harris asked a simple question.

“What do Democrats actually do when they have all the power?”

It turns out that 18 states in the US are effectively run by Democrats, who control both the executive and legislative branches. As Harris notes, Democratic leaders tend to blame Republicans for foiling their progressive plans, but that’s hardly the case in these 18 states where Republicans stand well away from the levers of power.

To answer his question—what do Democrats do when they have power?—Harris teamed up with Binyamin Appelbaum, the lead writer on business and economics on the Times editorial board and author of The Economists’ Hour.

What they found may surprise you.

First, Harris and Applebaum drilled into the 2020 Democratic Party Platform to see which values were most important to Democrats. They then focused on a particular state: California, the “quintessential liberal state” where Democrats rule with ironclad majorities and control the government in most major cities. Finally, the journalists decided to look at one specific policy: housing.

As Harris notes, housing policy is not exactly sexy stuff. But Applebaum stresses just how important housing is in battling inequality.

“Looking at California, you have to look at housing,” Applebaum says. “You cannot say you are against income inequality in America unless you are willing to have affordable housing built in your neighborhood….The neighborhood where you are born has a huge influence on the rest of your life.”

Moreover, Harris points out that Democrats overwhelmingly agree on its vital importance, noting that the word housing is mentioned more than 100 times in the Democrats’ platform. Indeed, Democrats are shown repeating a common mantra in the Times video.

“Housing is a human right.”

“Housing is a human right.”

“Housing is a human right.”

Democrats may say housing is a human right, but Applebaum notes their actions say something else, at least in California.

“You know those signs where you drive into a state and it says ‘Welcome to California’?” asks Applebaum. “You might as well replace them with signs that say KEEP OUT. Because in California the cost of housing is so high that for many people it’s simply unaffordable.”

As the Los Angeles Times noted in 2019, California has “an overregulation problem,” which is why nine of the 15 priciest metro areas in the US are in California and the median price of a house in San Diego is $830,000. In some cases, people have had to wait 20 years to build a pair of single family homes. (Applebaum, it’s worth noting, appears to misdiagnose the problem. He complains that “the state has simply for the most part stopped building housing.” Perhaps Applebaum simply misspoke, but it’s worth noting the state doesn’t need to build a single unit of housing; it simply needs to step back and allow the market to function.)

Regulations, however, aren’t the full story. As Harris notes, Californians themselves have fought tooth and nail to keep higher-density affordable housing out of their neighborhoods. Palo Alto is cited as an example, where voters in 2013 overturned a unanimous city council vote to rezone a 2.46-acre site to enable a housing development with 60 units for low-income seniors and 12 single-family homes.

“I think people aren’t living their values,” Applebaum says. “There’s an aspect of sort of greed here.”

Housing isn’t the only area the Times journalists find where progressives fail to “live their values.” Washington state having the most regressive tax rate in the US is cited as another example, as are the “gerrymandered” school districts in states like Illinois and Connecticut that consign low-income families to the least-funded schools because of their zip code.

The journalists are left with a gloomy conclusion.

“For some of these foundational Democratic values of housing equality, progressive taxation, and education equality, Democrats don’t actually embody their values very well,” Harris says.

Applebaum is even more blunt.

“Blue states are the problem,” the economics writer says. “Blue states are where the housing crisis is located. Blue states are where the disparities in education funding are the most dramatic. Blue states are the places where tens of thousands of homeless people are living on the streets. Blue states are the places where economic inequality is increasing most quickly in this country. This is not a problem of not doing well enough; it is a situation where blue states are the problem.”

Harris says affluent liberals “tend to be really good at showing up at the marches” and talking about their concerns over inequality. But when rubber meets the road, they tend to make decisions based on a different calculus: what benefits them personally.

For some, the findings and claims of the Times journalists could be jarring. But they are likely no surprise to FEE readers.

One of the pillars of public choice theory—a school of economics pioneered by Nobel Prize-winning economist James Buchanan—is that people make decisions based primarily on self-interest. (People act out of concern for others, too, but these interests tend to be secondary to self-interest.) Buchanan’s theory rests on the idea that all groups of people tend to reach decisions in this manner, including people acting in the political marketplace such as voters, politicians, and bureaucrats.

Many believe that self interest is part of the human condition, something as natural as hunger, love, and procreation. Harnessing the instinct of self-interest in a healthy way—through free exchange—has long been considered a cornerstone of capitalism and a key to a prosperous society.

“It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest,” Adam Smith famously observed in The Wealth of Nations. “We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our necessities but of their advantages.”

For many progressives, however, self-interest has become a kind of heresy. The idea that individuals should be motivated by such things as profit and self-interest is anathema; these are values to be found in Ayn Rand novels, not practiced in 21st century America.

But as Applebaum notes, progressives are in fact making decisions based on self-interest—he uses the word “greed”—not altruism. This should come as little surprise, and it would be perfectly fine if progressives were acting on self-interest in a market economy; but they are not. They are using the law in perverse ways to their own benefit—all while maintaining the belief that they’re acting out of altruism.

The Times article makes it clear that voters and politicians in progressive states still arrive at decisions like everyone else: on self-interest. The results are just far worse when those decisions are made in the political space, not the marketplace.


Jon Miltimore

Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Star Tribune. Bylines: Newsweek, The Washington Times,, The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, the Epoch Times.

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

Are AR-15 Rifles a Public Safety Threat? Here’s What the Data Say

Is it true that the AR-15, a popular firearm owned by millions of Americans, is a unique threat to public safety?

From Parkland, Florida, to San Bernardino, California, the semi-automatic AR-15 rifle and its variants have seemingly become the weapons of choice for mass shooters in the United States.

Many people simply cannot believe that regular civilians should be able to legally own so-called “weapons of war,” which they believe should only be in the hands of the military.

According to Pew Research, for example, 81 percent of Democrats and even 50 percent of Republicans believe the federal government should ban “assault-style rifles” like the AR-15. Given the massive amount of carnage AR-15s and similar rifles have caused, it makes sense that the civilian population simply cannot be trusted to own such weapons, right?

Perhaps, but is it really true that the AR-15, a popular firearm owned by millions of Americans, is a unique threat to public safety, so dangerous that it deserves to be banned or even confiscated by the federal government?

It cannot be emphasized enough that any homicide is a tragedy, but in order to get a sense of how dangerous to public safety “assault-style” rifles are, it’s useful to compare their usage in homicide to other methods.

The Center for Disease Control (CDC) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) are the two authoritative sources for homicide statistics in the United States.

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), the CDC reports “produce more accurate homicide trends at the national level” because they capture less under-reporting than the FBI statistics.

However, the homicide data recorded by the CDC includes all homicides committed by civilians regardless of criminal intent. The FBI data instead focuses on intentional homicides (i.e murder) known to law enforcement and excludes non-negligent homicide (i.e. manslaughter.)

According to the BJS, the FBI data is “better suited for understanding the circumstances surrounding homicide incidents.” This is especially true given that the FBI, but not the CDC, records the type of firearm used in a given homicide. For the purposes of this analysis, the data from the FBI will be used.

There are two further limitations of FBI data worth noting.

Firstly, the FBI reports do not look at “assault-style” rifles specifically, but rather, murders involving all types of rifles, whether they are committed with an AR-15 or a hunting rifle.

Secondly, each year there are a few thousand homicide cases where the type of firearm used goes unreported to the FBI. This means that some murders listed under “unknown firearm” may, in fact, be rifle murders.

To account for this under-reporting, we will extrapolate from rifles’ share of firearm murders where the type of weapon is known in order to estimate the number of “unknown” firearms that were in actuality rifle homicides.

If we take the time to look at the raw data provided by the FBI, we find that all rifles, not just “assault-style rifles,” constitute on average 340 homicides per year from 2007 through 2017 (see Figure 1.). When we adjust these numbers to take under-reporting into account, that number rises to an average of 439 per year.

Figure 2 compares rifle homicides to homicides with other non-firearm weapons. Believe it or not, between 2007 and 2017, nearly 1,700 people were murdered with a knife or sharp object per year. That’s almost four times the number of people murdered by an assailant with any sort of rifle.

Figure 1. The Relative and Absolute Frequency of Rifle Homicides 2007-2017

Figure 2. Homicides per year by weapon 2007 – 2017

In any given year, for every person murdered with a rifle, there are 15 murdered with handguns, 1.7 with hands or fists, and 1.2 with blunt instruments. In fact, homicides with any sort of rifle represent a mere 3.2 percent of all homicides on average over the past decade.

Given that the FBI statistics pertain to all rifles, the homicide frequency of “assault-style” rifles like the AR-15 is necessarily lesser still, as such firearms compose a fraction of all the rifles used in crime.

According to a New York Times analysis, since 2007, at least “173 people have been killed in mass shootings in the United States involving AR-15s.”

That’s 173 over a span of a decade, with an average of 17 homicides per year. To put this in perspective, consider that at this rate it would take almost one-hundred years of mass shootings with AR-15s to produce the same number of homicide victims that knives and sharp objects produce in one year.

With an average of 13,657 homicides per year during the 2007-2017 timeframe, about one-tenth of one percent of homicides were produced by mass shootings involving AR-15s.

Mass shootings involving rifles like the AR-15 can produce dozens of victims at one time, and combined with extensive media coverage of these events, many people have been led to believe that such rifles pose a significant threat to public safety.

However, such shootings are extremely rare, and a look at the FBI data informs us that homicide with these types of rifles represents an extremely small fraction of overall homicide violence. Banning or confiscating such firearms from the civilian population would likely produce little to no reduction in violent crime rates in America.


Being Classically Liberal

Follow Being Classically Liberal on Facebook.

RELATED ARTICLE: 9th Circuit Rules California’s Under 21 Gun Sales Ban Unconstitutional

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

So Much for the Rule of Law

These days it seems that Saul Alinsky has taken over the Democrat Party. This is no longer the party of JFK—not even close. JFK said in his Inaugural Address, “the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God.”

There is no God, says Saul Alinsky (1909-1972), the Marxist community organizer par excellence from Chicago. He perfected many of the “by any means necessary” tactics the left is using today—tactics on full display these days in the wake of challenges to Roe v. Wade.

Alinsky deeply influenced some key leaders of the left. Such as Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, who taught Saul Alinksy’s tactics to a whole new generation of “social warriors.”

Alinsky believed agitation was the key to overhauling the system. He said, “First rule of change is controversy. Change means movement and movement means friction and friction means heat and heat means controversy.”

He wrote the book on such change—Rules for Radicals, 1971. He dedicated this book to Satan—no kidding. “’Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology , and history … the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom—Lucifer.’”

Saul Alinsky believed that truth and morality are relative. He wrote, “The end justifies almost any means.”

He targeted Christians in order to break down Christian morality in society: “Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”

With this kind of thinking, virtually no Christian or person of good will could run for office because no one is perfect. Yet President Calvin Coolidge said, “If good men don’t hold office, bad men will.”

I believe we are seeing on display Alinsky-type tactics in last week’s unprecedented (possibly illegal) leaking of the Supreme Court decision-in-the-making that could possibly overturn Roe v. Wade. When the left doesn’t get what it wants through the rule of law, they resort to dirty tactics to get their way.

It is ironic that the left often uses the name of the late pro-abortion Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in their Alinskyite tactics because Ginsburg admitted that Roe v. Wade was poorly argued, which could one day lead to its overturn.

How are they using Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s name? Writing for (5/5/22), Steven Ertelt notes: “A group named ‘Ruth Sent Us’ is now calling for disruption and violence in Catholic churches, as well as protests outside the private homes of Supreme Court justices and their families. These radicals even published the justices’ home addresses.”

The UK Daily Mail (5/5/22) adds that the “Ruth Sent Us” activists sent this message to their followers: “Our 6-3 extremist Supreme Court routinely issues rulings that hurt women, racial minorities, LGBTQ+ and immigrant rights,’ the group’s website reads. ‘We must rise up to force accountability using a diversity of tactics.’”

And so the protests have begun outside of some of the justices homes. Justice Alito, who wrote the draft opinion, has now gone into hiding for his safety, with his family.

So much for the “right of privacy” the left claims to cherish. So much for the rule of law. So much for democracy (since these leftists appear to live in mortal fear that abortion will become subject to the voters). Welcome, mobocracy.

Amazingly, the Biden administration has no words of condemnation for this violation of the justices’ privacy—and the attempt to strong-arm the members of the Court to change their vote (which is a federal crime under the U.S. Code, though Biden’s Justice Department seems uninterested in enforcing it).

When asked if the president or she would condemn either the illegal release of the draft-opinion or the planned protests at the justices’ homes, press secretary Jen Psaki only said that such protests should be “peaceful.” On Monday, 5/9/22, she added that judges “must be able to do their jobs without concern for their personal safety.”

This reminds me of what comedian J. P. Sears said in a different context: “That’s, of course, a testament to how super tolerant the lefts is with absolutely everything, aside from 100% of the things they don’t like.”

The left did not get abortion on demand through the legislative process. It was brought in through judicial fiat in Roe v. Wade. Now that the Supreme Court might return the issue to the ballot, state by state, through the Dobbs v. Jackson decision, the left is in a terrible uproar and resorting to tactics unworthy of a civilized society.

Somewhere Saul Alinsky is smiling.

©Jerry Newcombe. All Rights reserved.

Paging the GOP: Stop the Surrender of Our Sovereignty

Weeks before the Chinese Communist Party unleashed the Covid-19 pandemic, its representatives participated in “Event 201,” a table-top exercise organized by, among others, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Its stated purpose was to see how a coronavirus pandemic could be used to strengthen world government.

A senior Biden administration official named Loyce Pace happens to be a graduate of the Bloomberg School. She is also the author of 13 amendments that would transform the head of the World Health Organization into the global arbiter of what constitutes public health emergencies and how they will be addressed. Not our government, but CCP-shill Tedros Ghebreyesus.

Former Representative Michele Bachmann says we need Republicans in Congress to conduct the equivalent of a general strike – no quorums, no legislation – until Ms. Pace’s appalling surrender of our national sovereignty is formally repudiated.

Do it now.

This is Frank Gaffney.

EDITORS NOTE: This Center for Security Policy podcast is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

OPERATION OVERLORD JUNE 7, 2022: MAGA Invades the Disinformation Governance Board

“[W]hen it comes to what we in the West have inherited all around us, this must count as one of the greatest gifts, if not the greatest gift, that any civilisation has left for those who came after. A gift not just in liberal order and beautiful cities and landscapes but in artistic achievement, cultural inheritance, and a wealth of examples of how to live.” – Douglas Murray, The War on the West.

Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. established the Disinformation Governance Board (DGB) as part of the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on April 27, 2022.

On May 4th, 2022 Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. stated “The MAGA crowd is really the most extreme political organization that has existed in American history.” Watch:

On May 10th, 2022 White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said opposing the Supreme Court precedent set in Roe v. Wade was an example of an “ultra MAGA” position. Watch:

We have seen those who disagree with the way this country is currently governed, from parents to the 79 million make America great again (MAGA) voters, labeled as extremists. It is time that we the people, a.k.a. “super MAGA” extremists, band together and use the DHS’ Disinformation Governance Board to expose the real lies, myths, mis, dis and mal-information pushed from the school house to the White House.

It is time to tell the truth and contest the uncontested absurdities that are being taught in classrooms nationwide, by political leaders from school boards, to city and county commissions to state legislators to members of Congress, to the Executive Branch and even in the federal Judiciary.

History is repeating itself. America faced the dual threats of National Socialism and Fascism during WWII. To end the tyranny that overran Europe General Dwight David Eisenhower executed his Operation Overlord plan to defeat the Nazis and Fascists. Today, we the MAGAs must create our own Operation Overlord plan to defeat those Fascisti in America who are determined to take away our Constitutional Republican form of government.

We must launch another Operation Overlord plan on June 7th, 2022 to take America back again. To keep America great. To make America great again.

We chose June 7th because it was on that day in 1966 when former actor Ronald Reagan first entered politics and was elected as the Governor of California.

United and together we band of brothers and sisters, mothers and fathers, men and women must save America.

Operation Overlord 2022

The Department of Homeland Security’s mantra is “If you see something, say something.” According to the DHS website,

Across the country, in our communities, we share everyday moments with our neighbors, family, coworkers, and friends. We go to work or school, the grocery store, or the gas station.

It’s easy to overlook these routine moments, but as you’re going about your day, if you see something that doesn’t seem quite right, say something.

By being alert and reporting suspicious activity to your local law enforcement, you can protect your family, neighbors, and community.

It is time, if you see something that doesn’t seem quite right, say something!

It is incumbent upon we the people to report suspicious activity to the DHS Disinformation Governance Board (DHS-DGB). At the moment that the DHS-DGB launches its website and establishes a reporting procedure, we the people are compelled to report on those we suspect are spread mis, dis and mal-information. Not to do so will only allow mis, dis and mal-information to continue.

We the people must flood the website with documented examples of mis, dis and mal-information being spread by teachers, government officials, elected officials, other citizens, public and private organizations, corporations, the legacy media, social media and members of all political parties.

Mis, dis and mal-information cannot survive when telling the truth is the national standard.

Here is a short list of mis, dis and mal-information that citizens must report to the DHS-DGB:

  1. The U.S. Constitution is and the Founding Fathers were racists as outline in Critical Race Theory (CRT). Any use of CRT from the public school classroom to the halls of Congress must be reported as a lie and myth.
  2. Those who promote, teach, spread to neighbors, family, coworkers, and friends the myth that there are more than two genders (male XX and female XY).
  3. Those that further the myth that the Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement is the “most extreme political organization that has existed in American history.”
  4. Those who promote diversity, inclusion and equity but do the exact opposite. Watch this video to understand that some profess to support diversity, inclusion and equity just not on their neighborhoods.
  5. That more government control of our lives (Fascism/Communism) is better than a free market system where one’s labors are rewarded based on ones efforts.
  6. Public schools teaching students what to think rather than giving them the skills to think for themselves. Teachers using tests, text books, films or other political materials to indoctrinate rather than educate.
  7. This who said that the 2020 election was the “most secure in American history.”
  8. Government at the local, state and federal level that pass laws to reward failure (welfare), rather than reward individual success (less regulation and taxation).
  9. Those that write, state, promote or pass a law promoting abortion and those who say or report that abortion is a Constitutional right.
  10. Those scientists, politicians, teachers, organizations and corporations that say, promote, advance the idea that mankind can control the climate and the weather, a.k.a. anthropogenic climate change.
  11. Those who label Israel as an “apartheid state” or support boycotting, divestment or sanctioning the state of Israel. This includes those individuals, organizations or corporations that support the myth of a “two state” solution.
  12. Those who do not believe that gun ownership is a Constitutional right that “shall not be infringed.” This includes efforts to limit or control the type of weapon, type of ammunition or magazines that American can buy or sell. This includes expanding the oversite of those who own guns and keep guns for self protection from criminals and their government.
  13. Those who corporations, doctors, media and social media personalities who promoted taking the Covid vaccine and supporting government mandates to get vaxxed.
  14. Those corporations, individuals, doctors, government officials and media and social media outlets that hid the truth about the negative affects of getting vaxxed.
  15. Those who via nebulous and ill defined “community standards” censor free speech, which is guaranteed under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
  16. Those who believe in government and not God.

Every American who loves liberty will join this effort to report mis, dis and mal-information to the DHS-DGB. If they respond then share their reply on social media and with friends. If they fail to respond then tell everyone you know that they aren’t doing their job. If you find that the DHS-DGB is a source of mis, dis or mal-information it may be time to take legal action and have the courts weigh in on the Constitutionality of the DHS-DGB.

The Bottom Line

President John F. Kennedy said, “The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.”

Ayn Rand warned, “The uncontested absurdities of today are the accepted slogans of tomorrow. They come to be accepted by degrees, by dint of constant pressure on one side and constant retreat on the other – until one day when they are suddenly declared to be the country’s official ideology.”

Today in America and globally we are facing uncontested absurdities (myths) that are no public policy.

It is time to fight back. It is time to send the truth to the DHS-DGB.

This is war. They have started it, just like the Nazis and Fascisti did in 1933. It is time for a full frontal attack on mis, dis and mal-information. It is time for Operation Overlord 2022 to tell the truth and take back our nation.

Super MAGAs rise up!

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: “Disinformation” & America’s Ministry of Truth – Unapologetic LIVE w/ Tony Kinnett



COLORADO: Mom says middle school invited her daughter to secret LGBTQ club, told students to keep info from parents

‘He Is Allowed’: Biden’s New Minister Of Truth Defended Hunter’s Burisma Gig

POLL: Vast Majority Of Americans Say SCOTUS Home Protests Are ‘Unacceptable’

Psaki Tells Americans That If You Don’t Support Roe V. Wade, You’re ‘Ultra MAGA’

‘Unless Somebody Drops Dead, This Is Going To Happen’: Abortion Activists Protest At Alito’s House

Liberals Melt Down Over Bipartisan SCOTUS Security Protection Bill

Police Dispatched As Pro-Abortion Activists Leave Message At Senator’s Home

Janet Yellen: Legal Abortion Is Important For The Economy, Labor Force Participation

‘This Was Only A Warning’: Radical Left-Wing Group Reportedly Takes Credit For Molotov Cocktail Attack Against Pro-Lifer…

Walgreens: Unvaxxed are testing positive for Covid-19 at the lowest rate, Triple Vaxxed at the highest

Michigan Police Seize Voting Machine During Investigation Into Possible Election Breaches

‘Hidden Tax’: Inflation Runs Rampant After Biden Skirts Blame On Rising Costs

VIDEO: Project Veritas Founder James O’Keefe’s Testimony Before Members of Congress

Project Veritas founder and CEO, James O’Keefe, testified today before Members of the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees regarding government overreach and spying on journalists.

The intent of the hearing was to defend Freedom of the Press and Journalists’ First Amendment Rights.

WATCH: James O’Keefe’s opening Statement

James O’Keefe’s Opening StatementCongressman Biggs and members in attendance, thank you for allowing me the opportunity this afternoon to tell my story. I especially want to thank all members of the House Judiciary Committee for the recent unanimous bipartisan support of new legislation, protecting journalists from government overreach. These are important first steps, but we face a government that in May of 2021 promised that the seizure of journalist data is simply wrong and quote, “will not happen” while simultaneously actively seizing journalists’ data…My home was raided by armed FBI agents in the pre-Dawn hours of November 6, 2021…There’s a sign when you walk into our [Project Veritas office] building, it says, “This Organization is Protected by Patriots,” referring to the millions of Americans who support our work and afford us the ability to defend the right of journalists to report on stories critical of even the most powerful people and politicians in the world…What steps you take now as Members of Congress to protect freedom of the press are essential. By the time they [FBI] come to your door with a battering ram, it’s already too late.”

WATCH: Question and answer session.

Q&A Highlights

Congressman Matt Gaetz: What Mr. O’Keefe’s circumstance designates is they [federal government] are willing to rip the Band-Aid off and use the government against journalism directly…Mr. O’Keefe, I learn something more every time I hear you speak about this. I had no idea that the [Justice] Department had tried to do an end run around a Special Master process. Would you mind taking a few moments to explain how?

James O’Keefe: Yes. Congressman, the Article Three Judge in New York, Southern District Judge Torres ordered a Special Master in my case in a two-page directive citing, and I quote, “First Amendment Journalistic Privilege.” After that, they [Justice Department] went around the judge to various magistrate judges in the Southern District to obtain secret warrants against Microsoft, to continue to gag Microsoft Corporation, which houses our emails. They tried to gag Microsoft after the federal judge, the judiciary appointed a Special Master citing the First Amendment. So, why would we trust the FBI and the Department of Justice to define who is, and who is not a journalist? Credit to Microsoft because Microsoft opposed the gag. And when they drafted that opposition, the Department of Justice backed down, and we went public with that in March.”

[ … ]

Congressman Michael Cloud: Mr. O’Keefe, in your case, you mentioned that you feel like you’ve been — you’re guilty until proven innocent in your case, and that you’re having to defend your journalistic practices. One thing that’s very troubling to me throughout this whole situation is the fact that all this is taxpayer funded. So, we have the intelligence agencies going after individuals. We have intelligence agencies going after political opponents. It’s all taxpayer funded to go after tax paying citizens. But there’s a phrase that’s been coined that I’d like you to speak to if you can. I first heard from Matt Gaetz over here, but it says the process is the punishment in the sense of, you could end up going through this whole process, proving your innocence, but the process ends up being the punishment. Could you speak to that? What you’re having to do to defend yourself?

James O’Keefe: Well, the whole idea of journalism is to get sources to trust you. And what do you think sources think when they put this journalist in handcuffs and take all their reporter notebooks? The chilling effect is self-evident. Maybe that’s what they’re trying to do either way. The legislative branch has to make sure that doesn’t happen. And the problem with probable execution of a search warrant, the ACLU lawyers were in my office, which was itself an extraordinary test fact to the principles involved here. And what they informed me is this has never happened before in American history. And I want to make sure that it never happens again to anybody. You don’t show up to a journalist’s home with a battering ram. As soon as they walk into your apartment with the battering ram and guns pointed at you, there’s no remedy. The constitutional violation is already too great. You’ve already passed the Rubicon. So, this can’t ever happen again…So now it’s upon you with your enumerated powers to do something about it so that they don’t do this to Josh Gerstein at Politico, or NBC News, or CBS News. They did it to me. I hope they never do it to anybody ever again.”

[ … ]

James O’Keefe:

1. I’m calling on all of you [members of the legislative branch] to create a Bartnicki hearing — a requirement that before subpoenas, warrants, or orders seeking journalists’ information, the government must first give notice and a hearing to the journalist with the burden of proof resting squarely on the government to clearly and convincingly — the clear and convincing standard above the probable cause standard — prove the journalist, in fact, played a part in committing the crime, rather than requiring the journalist to prove with a negative of innocence. Innocent until proven guilty. That concept is incompatible with probable cause against a journalist. 

2. Codify the right to challenge any subpoena, warrant or order seeking data from a third party where that data includes the journalists’ information. No more secret seizures of journalists’ information, period.

3. Fix the Privacy Protection Act and the 2703(d) process to provide for clear and meaningful damages to reporters who, like Project Veritas, have to spend millions in legal fees and legal bills to defend themselves from such egregious violations of the First Amendment. What steps you take now as Members of Congress to protect freedom of the press are essential. By the time they come to your door with a battering ram, it’s already too late. The violations of the Constitution are already too egregious. The battering ram was already at my door, but your work will save the unknown reporter, so that this never happens again on American soil.

The Project Veritas Team appreciates the concerns expressed by the Members of Congress present in today’s hearing.

Our hope is that REAL justice is served, and those who seek to undermine a journalist’s constitutional rights be held accountable.

EDITORS NOTE: This Project Veritas report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

FLORIDA: America First Makes RINO Carlos Gimenez (FL-28) Top Target for Removal from Congress in August Republican Primary Elections

WASHINGTON, D.C. /PRNewswire/ — America First Political Committee today announced that Censured RINO Carlos Gimenez (FL-28 Congressional District) is the top target for removal from Congress in the August 23, 2022 primary election.

RINO Gimenez otherwise known as a Socialist Democrat, has a long record of supporting radical socialist policy, dating back to his time as Miami-Dade Mayor.

As Miami-Dade Mayor, RINO Gimenez locked down and destroyed small businesses during Covid. Gimenez was also tainted with corruption and ethics accusations including unauthorized business dealings with Communist China.

In Washington, D.C., RINO Gimenez has voted with Nancy Pelosi and the radical leftists. Gimenez defended disgraced Liz Cheney after she voted in favor of the ‘Sham Impeachment’ against Donald Trump. Gimenez doubled down in defending Cheney after the Republican Caucus censored and removed Liz Cheney from Republican Party Leadership.

RINO Gimenez has openly voted with Nancy Pelosi and the radical Democrats in Congress on critical ‘Unconstitutional Issues’ far too many times and continues to support a socialist agenda:

  • RINO Gimenez openly supported and Voted for Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Agenda in 2016;
  • RINO Gimenez also voted for the ‘January 6‘ Democrat ‘Witch Hunt’ against American Citizens and Republican voters;
  • RINO Gimenez voted with Nancy Pelosi on H.R. 550, to allow the federal government to create a database, track unvaccinated Americans, who could be targeted, segregated, discriminated against, and forced to comply with vaccination mandates;
  • RINO Gimenez voted with Nancy Pelosi on Anti-Second Amendment legislation HR-8, making it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to purchase, own, carry, and use a firearm and
  • RINO Gimenez voted with Nancy Pelosi on H.R. 6 for ‘Open Borders and Amnesty’ to over 20 million criminal illegal aliens, which would permanently avoid deportation, obtain a pathway to citizenship, and full voting rights;
  • RINO Gimenez also voted with Nancy Pelosi and the radical Democrats to strip Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of all Congressional Committee positions.
  • RINO Gimenez voted with Nancy Pelosi on the wasteful $1.5 Trillion wasteful socialist spending bill packed with billions in earmarks (Pork);

About America First Political Committee:

Our mission is to protect the integrity of the U.S. Constitution, promote conservative political candidates and policy that puts America First.

Are We Witnessing the Brick-by-Brick Demolition of Western Civilisation?

Modern Westerners, sundered from their roots, attack their own culture.

In recent years, Douglas Murray has established himself as arguably the most important conservative political commentator in the English-speaking world.

Given the rise of Black Lives Matter, the racial riots of 2020 and the upsurge in hostility towards Western history — exemplified by the determination of leftist activists to tear down statues of major historical figures — the focus of his new book is of little surprise.

The War on the West provides a thorough examination of the charges now levelled against Western (and for the most part, European and Christian) civilisation, along with a full-throated defence of what Murray argues is the positive cultural, social, religious and political inheritance of all those who belong to it.

The book’s structure is admirably straightforward, being divided into four main chapters with the titles of “Race”, “History”, “Reparations” and “Culture”.

Separate interludes also feature, each of which is devoted to a key topic which helps clarify the importance of the subject under discussion.

Cultural battles

In his usual engaging and provocative style, the author sets out his stall early on in stark terms. A highly-important cultural war, he writes, “is being waged remorselessly against all the roots of the Western tradition and against everything good that the Western tradition has produced.”

Academic courses dealing with Western civilisation are frowned upon, influential figures from history are being “cancelled” due to allegations that they held intolerable views by today’s standards, and demands for radical measures to counteract “systemic racism” in all sorts of areas are now routinely made, with dire social consequences for any who dare object to this in public.

The chorus of criticism for the past — for imperialism, colonialismslavery and much else besides — leaves little room for any acknowledgement of the positive contributions of Europe, the United States and other outposts of a civilisation which has been responsible for such an extraordinarily disproportionate amount of man’s achievements.

The word “civilisation” is important here. Murray notes how the BBC recently sought to emulate the success of Kenneth Clark’s glorious Civilisation series from 1969 by creating a far more self-consciously inclusive show titled Civilisations, in which the presenters had to try desperately hard “to make sure that they didn’t sound as if they were saying the West was better than anywhere else.”

Murray maintains that both the West’s Judaeo-Christian heritage (what he calls its Jerusalem pillar) and the secular Enlightenment (referred to as the Athens pillar) are under attack, and he goes to considerable lengths to defend both.

Historical wounds

Considering recent unrest sparked by the killing of several unarmed African-Americans by police in the United States, it is unsurprising that race occupies so much of this book.

Many of the cultural flashpoints in recent times have related to the slave trade and America’s difficult history.

In placing these issues in a broader context, Murray observes that limited historical education or awareness means that most people are unaware of the widespread racism which still exists in most societies, notably China.

China’s monoethnic leadership class — like similar tyrants elsewhere — are quick to denounce Western countries, while rejecting any criticism of historical or current abuses taking place in their own countries — such as the vicious persecution of China’s Uyghur minority.

Western self-criticism — Murray uses the example of President Biden’s ambassador to the United Nations, who has spoken at length before the General Assembly about racism in her homeland — does not encourage other countries to adopt a similar approach.

Furthermore, there is a particularly glaring double standard when it comes to topics like slavery.

While millions of Africans were sold to rapacious Europeans for use in their colonies, far more Africans were transported east as part of the Arab Muslim slave trade. The reason for this being widely unknown is particularly eye-opening: black slaves were routinely castrated by their Arab owners, and so no African population survived there long-term.

The liberal nature of Western countries, born of a political philosophy which first developed in Europe before being exported elsewhere, makes them naturally more vulnerable to this kind of attack.

Historically, this relative openness has also meant that Westerners have spent more time studying the cultures of others and incorporating aspects of them: which in turn can lead to risible charges of cultural appropriation.

A new religion

In the past, Murray — a British atheist who was raised as an Anglican, and educated in a Catholic school — has frequently pointed to the role of Christianity in shaping Western culture and values.

Here, he quotes the Columbia University Professor John McWhorter when describing how the decline of Christianity in the Western world has left a vacuum which is being filled by the “anti-racism” movement, which sees white privilege as the original sin.

Murray also describes how moribund religious institutions like the Church of England and America’s Episcopalian Church have adopted an increasingly self-flagellating tone when condemning their own historical records.

Unfortunately, the chapter titled “Religion” falls short on some counts.

Rather than being exclusively focused on the issue of the relationship between Christianity and the unique Western culture which it helped create, the discussion wanders on to how charges of racism are now being levelled against secular philosophers, coupled with an undeniably interesting critique of how the flaws and outright crimes of left-wing thinkers such as Marx and Foucault are being deliberately ignored by those who insist on deconstructing every other historical figure of note.

When pondering the willingness of those in today’s West to celebrate other traditions while ignoring their own, Murray points to “the trend that leads young Americans and Europeans to travel the world to find the temples of the Far East, while failing to spend any time in the cathedrals on their own doorsteps.”

Lost landscape

Concluding the book and emphasising one of his core points on gratitude, he again refers to Europe’s most aesthetically striking churches as an example of something important which we have inherited from those who went before us and laboured to build them.

It is a point he also made in “The Strange Death of Europe”, when considering what future lay in store for our continent. He wrote then that he could not “help feeling that much of the future of Europe will be decided on what our attitude is towards the church buildings and other great cultural buildings of our heritage standing in our midst. Around the questions of whether we hate them, ignore them, engage with them or revere them, a huge amount will depend.”

As an unbeliever, his discomfort in expanding on this point appears obvious — as was shown in his recent interview with Jordan Peterson, where he spoke of his “deeply complex, conflicted and inadequate answers,” while also describing how undeniably “God haunted, and Christ haunted” the West’s cultural memory is.

It is difficult in the long run for any society to engage with a cathedral or a great work of art focused on a religion which that society’s members no longer believe to be true.

Going further, we can also say that it is difficult for a faithless generation to relate to the ancestors who sacrificed so much to raise great churches in the very centre of each and every city and town.

When the shared bond of religious feeling between generations is ripped asunder, it becomes far easier to dismiss most or even all of what was achieved by our predecessors, while also making it easier to condemn them in unequivocal and needlessly dismissive terms for what are failings by today’s standards.

The collapse of religious belief is not just one of many factors responsible for the collapse in cultural self-confidence in the West, it is surely the pre-eminent factor, and it deserved more than the incomplete acknowledgement which is provided here.

At the same time, this book is an absorbing account of what we who are part of the Western world can be thankful for, while also being a clarion call for why the ongoing assault against our civilisation must be resisted.

“[W]hen it comes to what we in the West have inherited all around us, this must count as one of the greatest gifts, if not the greatest gift, that any civilisation has left for those who came after. A gift not just in liberal order and beautiful cities and landscapes but in artistic achievement, cultural inheritance, and a wealth of examples of how to live,” Murray writes. This theme of gratitude is keenly felt throughout this book, and anyone who believes in the Western tradition should be grateful that it has Douglas Murray as one of its most able and eloquent defenders.


James Bradshaw

James Bradshaw works for an international consulting firm based in Dublin, and has a background in journalism and public policy. Outside of work, he writes for a number of publications, on topics including… More by James Bradshaw

RELATED VIDEO: What happened when Lawrence Jones followed a bus of migrants.

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

Disney hasn’t found itself in this much trouble since 1941

The family-friendly, controversy-averse Walt Disney Co. has walked into the buzz saw of the American culture wars, version 2022.

In April, officials at Disney objected to a Florida law prohibiting instruction in sexual orientation and gender identity in kindergarten through third grade. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis responded by signing a bill revoking Disney’s self-governing status, a unique arrangement in which the company operated like an independent fiefdom within the state.

Traditionally, the custodians of one of Hollywood’s most reliable cash machines have been careful to sidestep political minefields that might remind customers of a realm outside the Magic Kingdom. Better to wallow with Scrooge McDuck in the Money Bin than be caught in the crosshairs of Fox News chyrons.

Only once before has the Disney brand gotten so entangled in a public relations briar patch – in 1941, when the original iteration of the company was confronted by an internal revolt that pitted the founding visionary against his pen-and-ink scriveners.

The characters in the showdown were as colorful as any drawn on the studio’s animation cels: union activists, gangsters, communists and anti-communists, and, not least, Walt Disney himself, who, dropping his avuncular persona, played a long game of political hardball and slow-burn payback.

Workers grumble as Disney’s star soars

Even then, Walt Disney inspired a special kind of awe around Hollywood.

Billy Wilkerson, editor of The Hollywood Reporter, declared Disney “the only real genius in this business” in the Dec. 17, 1937, issue of the periodical.

Disney was hailed as the father of the first sound cartoon, “Steamboat Willie” (1928); the first Technicolor cartoon, “Flowers and Trees” (1932); and the first feature-length cartoon, “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” (1937).

“Snow White” marked the beginning of the extraordinary creative streak – “Pinocchio” and “Fantasia” in 1940, “Dumbo” the following year and 1942’s “Bambi” – on which the Disney mythos would be built forever.

In 1940, Disney plowed the profits from “Snow White” into a state-of-the-art animation studio in Burbank, California, where the comfort of his workers, so he said, was a high priority.

“One of Walt Disney’s greatest wishes has always been that his employees could work in ideal surroundings,” read an advertisement in the Oct. 10, 1940, issue of The Hollywood Reporter. “The dean of animated cartoons realizes that a happy personnel turns out the best work.”

But even by the standards of exploitative Hollywood shop floors, Disney animators were overworked and underpaid. Forced to hunch over a drawing board for 10 hours a day, they had no desire to whistle while they worked. Instead, they wanted a strong union to negotiate on their behalf. Disney didn’t want any of it.

The animators opted to be represented by the confrontational Screen Cartoonists Guild rather than the pro-management “company union,” the American Society of Screen Cartoonists.

“Disney cartoonists make less than house painters,” charged the guild. “The girls are the lowest paid in the entire cartoon field. They earn from $16 to $20 a week, with very few earning as high as $22.50.” The guild demanded a 40-hour, five-day work week, severance pay, paid vacation and a minimum wage scale ranging from $18 a week for apprentices to $250 for cartoon directors.

To go nose to nose with Disney in the negotiations, the Screen Cartoonists Guild chose Herbert Sorrell of the Motion Picture Painters, Local 644, a longtime thorn in the side of studio management.

Sorrell was a broad-shouldered union man of the old-school variety. A former heavyweight prize fighter, he was not afraid to mix it up on the picket line with cops and strikebreakers.

Sorrell’s footwork in the boxing ring – not to mention the brass knuckles he carried – came in handy. In the 1930s, labor organizing in Hollywood could be more hazardous than stunt work. Many studio heads had already cut sweetheart deals with the mobbed-up trade unions, notably the International Alliance of Theatrical and Stage Employees, run by a Chicago-schooled gangster named Willie Bioff.

Animators put down their pens

On May 28, 1941, the Screen Cartoonists Guild called a strike, and hundreds of animators walked out on Disney.

Brazenly violating Disney’s copyright, the strikers repurposed Disney characters into pro-union spokesmen and paraded outside theaters playing Disney films.

There are no strings on me!” exclaimed Pinocchio in one placard. The slogans were as clever as the visuals: “Snow White and 700 Dwarfs,” “3 Years College, 2 Years Art School, 5 Years Animation Equals 1 Hamburger Stand” and “Are We Mice or Men?

Disney was enraged. He claimed that Sorrell had threatened to turn the Burbank studio into a “dust bowl” unless he caved to the strikers’ demands.

Behind the scenes, Disney offered the SCG a deal brokered by the gangster Willie Bioff.

Disney then placed ads in the trade press saying he had made generous offers to “your leaders” – that would be Bioff – and had acceded to most of the strikers’ demands.

“I am positively convinced that Communistic agitation, leadership and activities have brought about this strike, and has persuaded you to reject this fair and equitable settlement,” Disney said.

“Dear Walt,” Sorrell retorted, “Willie Bioff is not our leader. Present your terms to OUR elected leaders, so that they may be presented to us and there should be no difficulty in quickly settling our differences.”

Eventually, the feds, in the person of the National Labor Relations Board, intervened. On July 29, after 62 days of rage on both sides, Disney settled – through clenched teeth. Disney and the Screen Cartoonists Guild squabbled intermittently until the end of the year, but Sorrell had won on the big points: better wages, job security and a “closed shop,” which requires union membership as a condition for employment.

Disney’s revenge

To Disney, though, this wasn’t just a dispute between management and labor. It was oedipal rebellion against the father in his own house.

In October 1947, Disney got his chance for revenge when he testified before the House Committee on Un-American Activities, which was investigating Hollywood for alleged communist subversion in motion picture content and within the ranks of organized labor.

Disney was called as a friendly witness, and friendly he was: While waiting to testify, he good-naturedly sketched pictures of Donald Duck and Mickey Mouse for the children of the committee members.

At the witness table, Disney emphasized that while today “everyone in my studio is 100% American,” the percentage had not always been so high. He named the name that had stuck in his craw since 1941. “A delegation of my boys, my artists, came to me and told me that Mr. Herbert Sorrell … was trying to take them over,” Disney said. Sorrell and his cohorts, charged Disney, “are communists,” though admittedly, “no one has any way of proving those things.”

Proven or not, Disney’s allegations were career-killers. Many of the activist cartoonists of 1941 fell victim to Hollywood’s notorious blacklist era, when hundreds of workers on both sides of the screen were rendered persona non grata at the studios for their political affinities.

As a result, the Screen Cartoonists Guild softened its tone. In 1952, it voted to become affiliated with the firmly anti-communist International Alliance of Theatrical and Stage Employees – Bioff’s former outfit. As for Sorrell, he was hounded by charges of communist sympathies and ultimately barred from a leadership position in his own union.

Disney, you know about. After venting before the House Committee on Un-American Activities, he navigated the company back to the 50-yard line of America’s culture wars. There the entertainment conglomerate stayed – until recently, when it wandered off Disney World into the swampland of Florida politics.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


Thomas Doherty

A cultural historian with a special interest in Hollywood cinema, Thomas Doherty is a professor of American Studies at Brandeis University. He is an associate editor for the film magazine Cineaste and… More by Thomas Doherty

RELATED ARTICLE: Disney Actress and Husband Convicted of Child Sex Charges

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

All Swamp Creatures Great and Small

Alligators, snakes, and raccoons live in swamps.  They bite, but not as bad as the alligators, snakes, and racketeers who inhabit the D.C. swamp.

They say the fish rots from the head down, so let’s take a look at some swamp creatures who have strong ties to Joe Biden.  We start with Jen Psaki, White House press secretary who is moving on to MSNBC this week.  This humble public servant is already worth millions, and reportedly will earn millions more at MSNBC.  Jen, don’t let the revolving door hit you on the backside on your way out.

Longtime Biden ally Chris Dodd has been appointed to represent the U.S. at a Latin America summit, despite having a conflict of interest.  His lobbying and law firm has a Latin America practice which stands to benefit from Dodd’s appointment.

The brother of a senior White House official is lobbying for the drug industry.

Other Biden administration officials lower on the food chain are still feeding well in the swamp.  An inexperienced nonprofit was awarded a $530 million government contract to find hotel rooms for illegal aliens just months after it hired a Biden administration official.

Prior administrations had their own swamp creatures.  It was an open secret for years that a woman at the VA was mixed up with her husband’s employer, a veteran’s benefits group, while running the GI Bill program.

An Obama ambassadorial appointee has been criminally charged with soliciting foreign work while in office.  He is accused of having a role in an illegal lobbying campaign for Qatar.

A long-time FDA employee just went through the revolving door to work on regulatory compliance for a global drug company.

What would a swamp be without swamp water?  Lots of people are swimming in federal cash who shouldn’t be.  The Biden administration is steering federal funds to Democrat donors, including a $500 million federal loan to a solar company co-owned by a big Biden donor, and $3 million in federal contracts to a medical technology company owned by another big donor.  Meanwhile, a lot of federal COVID money has disappeared.  There was widespread fraud in the Paycheck Protection Program where funds went to buy Ferraris, yachts, jets, and jewels.  The fraud added up to more than $80 billion, ten percent of the entire program.

Tomorrow, I’ll tell you about the creatures who inhabit the other end of the swamp, the Congress critters whose feeding ground is Capitol Hill.  I’ll stop today with the observation that corruption and fraud is what we get for not being adequately engaged in our own governance.  Plato said, “One of the penalties of refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.”  The thing about our inferiors is, they make more money than we do, for no good reason, and that’s infuriating.

Visit The Daily Skirmish and Watch Eagle Headline News – 7:30am ET Weekdays

©Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

The Biden administration’s ‘Disinformation’ Board is a tool straight from Soviet Russia’s KGB

The Biden administration re-defined disinformation, sanitized the term of its KGB roots, and expanded the definition by applying the label to Americans.

AKGB term of tradecraft is now part of U.S. Department of Homeland Security governance.

The new Biden administration “Disinformation Governance Board,” Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas told CNN, is a “small working group” to “address threats, the connectivity between threats and acts of violence” without “infringing on free speech” and while “protecting civil rights and civil liberties, the right to privacy.” The board has no “operational authority” of its own, Mayorkas said.

Mayorkas denied that the board will cause American citizens to be monitored, saying, “we, the Department of Homeland Security, don’t monitor American citizens.”

That might be true. But Mayorkas went on to say the Disinformation Governance Board is mandated to provide “best practices and communicate those best practices to the operators” in agencies that do have “operational authority.”

Never before has “disinformation governance” been part of the official U.S. government terminology for defending the internal security of the country.

“Disinformation” is not a word from the English language. It is a direct translation of the Russian word dezinformatsiya. It is a KGB form of tradecraft from the Red Banner Institute of the KGB First Chief Directorate, otherwise known as the KGB foreign spy academy.

Disinformation is definition 159 in the KGB’s “Lexicon of KGB Terms,” published internally by the Soviet foreign intelligence service before 1984. Here it is: “Misleading by means of false information; A form of intelligence work in the Active Measures field, which consists of the secret channeling towards an adversary of false information, especially prepared materials and fabricated documents designed to mislead him and prompt him to take decisions and measures which fit with the plans and intentions of the Intelligence Service.”

“Active measures” is another KGB term of tradecraft. The KGB lexicon defines active measures as “Agent operational measures aimed at exerting useful influence on aspects of the political life of a target country which are of interest, its foreign policy, the solution of international problems, misleading the adversary, undermining and weakening its positions, the disruption of his hostile plans, and the achievement of other aims.”

Disinformation is a component of active measures. Foreign “agent operational measures” make the defense against disinformation and active measures a counterintelligence function, not a homeland security one. DHS has no statutory counterintelligence authority. That authority, as well as the authority to combat foreign disinformation and propaganda, rests by law with the FBI.

Whether the FBI remains fit for this role is another matter. The point is that combating foreign disinformation domestically is counterintelligence, which by law is not a DHS responsibility.

Even if the Disinformation Governance Board did have such a legitimate purpose, it would rest in the DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis. Instead, this disinformation board is housed in the very political DHS Office of Strategy, Policy, and Plans, and therefore is a potential domestic political instrument.

Thus the board, as Mayorkas explained it, will not spy on American citizens’ free speech per se, but will provide the “best practices” and policy guidance to those who do.

“Disinformation” did not enter into widespread use in English until the 1980s, when the Reagan administration, with bipartisan support in Congress, launched a State Department-led Office to Counter Soviet Active Measures and Disinformation to combat Soviet political warfare worldwide, without impinging on the free speech of American citizens. (References to that office have been practically wiped from online search engines.) The State Department retains a small office to monitor foreign disinformation.

KGB Major Anatoliy Golitsyn, Czechoslovakian intelligence officer Ladislav Bittman, KGB Major Ladislav Levchenko, and others shed more light on disinformation after they fled to the United States between 1961 and 1979 during the Cold War. All agreed that disinformation was a purely KGB term of tradecraft. All wrote books on the subject.

The origin of disinformation as an operational word is rooted in Joseph Stalin’s NKVD secret police, with some references to the earliest days of World War II. The Oxford English Dictionary has no definition of the word prior to 1947, when the Cold War began. Merriam-Webster traces “disinformation” to hearings on Communist subversion in 1953, and to Nazi and Soviet techniques as early as 1940. Occasional usage of the word appeared in the 19th century as an infrequent, contrived, “non-standard synonym of misinformation.”

“Misinformation,” of course, isn’t the same as disinformation. It is a mis-statement, or the inadvertent or careless spreading of inaccuracies or untruths, without malign intent. Yet Mayorkas and others have used the two terms interchangeably. So have many public “experts.”

Under the Trump administration, DHS created a Countering Foreign Influence Task Force within the department’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. The Biden administration morphed it into the “Mis- Dis- and Malinformation” (MDM) team whose stated job is to build “national resilience to MDM and foreign influence activities.”

Note the modification: keeping the old countering foreign influence function and adding what MDM calls “false or misleading information” in general. MDM thus became a federal government influence operational entity of its own. The Disinformation Governance Board is an interagency add-on within the DHS policy shop.

While it does explain the distinctions between misinformation and disinformation, the DHS MDM Team has sanitized the origins of “disinformation” as a KGB term of tradecraft. Indeed, it erased the distinction between disinformation as a foreign active measures technique and the simple use or abuse of words in domestic American political discourse.

Last year, DHS re-defined disinformation as follows: “Disinformation is deliberately created to mislead, harm, or manipulate a person, social group, organization, or country.”

So DHS re-defined disinformation, sanitized the term of its KGB roots, and expanded the definition by removing the foreign element and applying the label to First Amendment-protected political discourse. DHS then officially adopted the KGB word as its own to create a political board for “governance” of disinformation — whatever that is — to guide agencies to monitor American citizens’ free speech.


J. Michael Waller

Senior Analyst for Strategy.

RELATED ARTICLE: Europe moves many steps forward to mass surveillance

EDITORS NOTE: This Center for Security Policy column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.