Posted originally on Mar 20, 2024 By Martin Armstrong
Anyone with access to the internet from 2019 to 2020 can tell you that Google did, in fact, meddle in the 2020 US Presidential Elections in favor of then-candidate Joe Biden. Media Research Center found that Google interfered 41 times over the last 16 years, which is a drastic underestimation. Google continues to interfere in politics by using its algorithm to favor pro-Biden and anti-Trump results; even its failed AI system, Gemini, refused to criticize the Biden regime.
The issue is that Google is the most popular search engine. “Google” has become a verb; “Google” [insert search criteria here] for information. Not many realize that the information they are seeking on Google is censored, filtered, and deliberately presented to users in certain areas to align with its interests. Google heavily lobbies governments globally, but has an extreme sway over politicians within the establishment on the right and left.
“MRC researchers have found 41 times where Google interfered in elections over the last 16 years, and its impact has surged dramatically, making it evermoreharmful to democracy. In every case, Google harmed the candidates – regardless of party – who threatened its left-wing candidate of choice,” MRC Free Speech America vice president Dan Schneider and editor Gabriela Pariseau co-authored. Again, Google targets ANY anti-establishment candidate, but the study found that the search engine pushes “electoral victory [for] the most liberal candidates, regardless of the party, while targeting their opponents for censorship.”
This has been going on for many years, and the public is unaware that they have been subconsciously deceived. Google tried to protect Hillary Clinton in 2016 by suppressing unfavorable search results, and it protected Barack Obama in 2008 similarly. Google interferes in elections and business globally and has partnered with the World Economic Forum and other globalist cabals. The forces are doing everything in their power to remove our access to information amid this private wave where the public has lost all trust in the establishment.
Millions of people use Google daily to access information that is heavily censored and skewed in favor of left-leaning establishment politics. You can try it for yourself to see what search results appear when attempting to look up information about a particular situation or candidate. Google is not only altering information, but it is collecting your data while doing so.
I will explain in an upcoming blog post how Google and META bought the entirety of Congress. DuckDuckGo, Brave Search, and other search engines are far superior to Google. Bing, Google, and Yahoo, three of the most popular search engines, have all been compromised.
Join Kerry Lutz and renowned economist Martin Armstrong for a captivating discussion centered around the Socrates computer model’s uncanny accuracy in predicting political and market trends since 1985. Discover the model’s compelling projection of a 61% chance for a Republican victory in the upcoming 2024 election and its implications for the political landscape.
Delve into the erosion of confidence in government, potential election irregularities, and the profound impact of deviations from historical election norms. Gain insights into the influence of various political agendas, including discussions about veiled threats and the involvement of influential figures like Klaus Schwab and George Soros in funding Democratic elections.
Transitioning to market forecasts, Martin Armstrong reaffirms his earlier prediction regarding the crucial turning point in January. Explore the far-reaching effects of global capital trends on stock markets, with a focus on how geopolitical events shape investment decisions and influence various stock market indexes.
The conversation also tackles pressing economic issues, such as the potential consequences of increased taxes and selective debt default, the dollar’s reserve currency status, and the challenges faced by farmers and migration trends within the United States. Despite technical challenges, Kerry Lutz and Martin Armstrong exhibit adaptability and resilience, making this discussion a must-watch for those seeking insights into the ever-evolving world of politics and finance.
Posted originally on Jan 24, 2024 By Martin Armstrong
We have a MAJOR Constitutional Crisis between the actions of Biden himself and the recent Supreme Court ruling against Texas relying on the Supremacy Clause, which defies the entire intent of the purpose and promises of joining the union. It is astonishing that Justices Roberts and Barrett sided with the left wing and have allowed Biden’s federal officers to continue removing the border fencing erected by the state of Texas while the case is pending.
I am sorry; the Supreme Court is seriously wrong in this decision. The Supremacy Clause may say that Federal decrees overrule state law, but here we are talking about an executive order that is not democratically enacted or even presented to Congress. If the President decrees that you must kill all your firstborn, which Congress never enacted, does that force everyone to do so because of the Supremacy Clause? It is fundamental in the interpretation of law or the Constitution that you cannot interpret one clause of the Constitution in such a way that it violates another.
Article IV
Section 4 The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
Article I Legislative Branch Section 10 Powers Denied States
Clause 3 Acts Requiring Consent of Congress No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.
The Texas response to the Supreme Court’s order has sparked a heated debate, but honest, serious legal questions have emerged that go to the very heart of the United States’ structure and why Biden has so divided the country. It truly can no longer stand united. In defiance of the Supreme Court’s order, which was SERIOUSLY FLAWED, a decision to install even more razor wire in Eagle Pass has raised several questions about the state’s authority and its conflict with federal laws.
The defiance of the Supreme Court’s order has also raised concerns about the respect for the rule of law, as some expressed fears that this could lead to a conflict between the state and federal authorities. Under this interpretation, Biden should send troops and invade Texas as if this were the Civil War. After all, that’s what Abraham Lincoln did. Some of this is that Texas could take its case to the international court. That is absurd, for the US has refused to join the International Criminal Court, so they have no jurisdiction.
Biden Has No Authority to Refuse to Execute the Immigration Law as it stands now contrary to his Oath of Office.
Biden took an oath of office which states:
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
An executive order is a directive from the President with much of the same power as a federal law. Several landmark moments in American history came about directly from the use of executive orders issued from the White House’s desk, including one Supreme Court decision that limited a presidential executive order issued by Harry Truman in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952). This is a critical case because it directly deals with an Executive Order.
Truman believed to avert a nationwide strike of steel workers in April 1952, claiming it would jeopardize national defense, he issued an Executive Order directing the Secretary of Commerce to seize and operate most of the steel mills in the country. There was no statutory authority granting such authority. Still, Truman asserted that it was covered by the claim that his power was based on all powers vested in the President by the Constitution and laws of the United States and as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces.
The Secretary issued an order to seize the steel mills and directed their presidents to operate them as operating managers for the United States as if they were slaves. Truman did report his action to Congress, but Congress took no action. Even the Fifth Amendment Taking Clause was ignored. This even prevents the claims that the government will just confiscate everyone’s assets. The military is what supports the government and takes its assets away as well, and the government falls.
So here we have the only Supreme Court case on an Executive Order, and the Supreme Court limited and reduced it. It expressly held that the Executive Order was not authorized by the Constitution or laws of the United States, and it cannot stand. Pp. 343 U. S. 585-589. Furthermore, it expressly stated that there is no statute that expressly or impliedly authorizes the President to take possession of this property as he did here. Pp. 343 U. S. 585-586.
Biden Has Committed Treason by Deliberately Violating His Oath of Office
ARTICLE III Section 3 Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
The Court construed the other treason offense authorized by the Constitution similarly narrowly in Cramer v. United States (1945). That case involved another infamous incident in American history: the Nazi Saboteur Affair. Cramer was prosecuted for treason for allegedly helping German soldiers who had secretly infiltrated American soil during World War II. In reviewing Cramer’s treason conviction, the Court explained that a person could be convicted of treason ONLY if he or she adhered to an enemy and gave that enemy “aid and comfort” which Biden is doing.
As the Cramer Court explained:
“A citizen intellectually or emotionally may favor the enemy and harbor sympathies or convictions disloyal to this country’s policy or interest, but, so long as he commits no act of aid and comfort to the enemy, there is no treason. On the other hand, a citizen may take actions which do aid and comfort the enemy—making a speech critical of the government or opposing its measures, profiteering, striking in defense plants or essential work, and the hundred other things which impair our cohesion and diminish our strength—but if there is no adherence to the enemy in this, if there is no intent to betray, there is no treason.”
In other words, the Constitution requires both concrete action and an intent to betray the nation before a citizen can be convicted of treason; expressing traitorous thoughts or intentions alone does not suffice.
From October 2022 last year to September 2023, officials at the southern border have arrested 169 people whose names matched those on the terrorist watch list, compared with 98 during the previous fiscal year and 15 in 2021, according to government data. These are just the people they caught. Watch RFK’s Nightmare at the Border, and he has confirmed that the majority of the people coming in are NOT from South America.
Governor Abbot is Correct
Biden is REFUSING to execute the law passed by Congress and has embarked on an agenda that, WHATEVER Trump did, he has to reverse regardless of the consequences. For a president to REFUSE to execute the law, NO statutory or constitutional authority allows him to do so. Not only is the Governor correct, but this illustrates why the United States cannot stand as a union, for once again, the government usurps all authority to a central government as did Stalin in Russia, and it is only a matter of time before the government to collapse. That is the verdict throughout history – no dictatorial central government has ever survived long-term.
The Roman Empire split over this same issue. In fact, Postumus (260-269AD) issued a coin with the reverse showing him coming to the rescue to defend France, Netherlands, and Britain against the flood of immigrants pouring in from the other side of the Danube – the Restitutor Galliar” (the restorer of Gaul).
As many know, the computer has been forecasting civil unrest, and eventually, the United States will split, as will Europe. Centralized Control, when adopted by a government, ends the very purpose of forming a civilization when everyone benefits. This Biden Administration is acting by an executive order bypassing the Congress that theoretically represented We the People. These forecasts are by no means my personal opinion or wish. I have done my best to WARN the government that this path leads to dissolution. But they refuse to listen and prefer to roll around in the mud like a pig with no cares in the world. It is HISTORY that warns this is not going to end nicely. But nobody will listen because they prefer Klaus Schwab’s new world of total power ending elections.
COMMENT: When will the people stay a boycott of Pfsir as they did with Bud Light?
HB
ANSWER: The court in South Africa ordered the government to release the contract with Pfizer that they were preventing the public from having access. Quite honestly, ANY politicians who voted for the vaccines by Pfizer should be voted out of office. This contract states, “Accordingly, Pfizer and its Affiliates shall have no liability for any failure by Pfizer or its Affiliates…” id/2.1(d), Page 8. This is completely outrageous that ANY politicians would waive all liability for a vaccine. Suppose a car manufacturer produces a car that blows up when you start it, but only one in 500. If they have no liability, then why fix it?
Under capitalism, every company is liable for its product that is manufactured. Where does Pfizer get off with this with the appearance of paying bribes and gifts to politicians? People questioned our forecast made back on August 26th, 2021, that that should have been the high and that: “Something is very strange when it comes to Pfizer. The rally should not extend beyond 2022…”
This is why Socrates is so important. The criticism I got for that forecast was that their profits would continue to rise, so why should the stock collapse? The computer forecasts are better than any human. Why? Because humans get all caught up in the fundamental news when the computer is analyzing it dispassionately.
When will the people rise up and boycott Pfizer? Personally, I refuse to accept anything from Pfizer for myself or my dogs. I would never advise Pfizer, nor would I advise any company in bed with Pfizer. I wouldn’t say I like their way of doing business. I believe the company has rigged the game, and the politicians sold our rights, which I believe was unconstitutional. But find a judge who will honestly address this question. Good luck!
A year-end closing below the $33.20 level, and we may see crash mode for 2024. Anyone who has family working at this firm should look for employment elsewhere. I would not rule out that some people may seek revenge against those who worked there during the coming civil unrest. You never know anymore. They have pushed the envelope way too far on all of this. A break of that level points to a test of the $28 range, and a break of that area will warn that Pfizer could be looking at the $6-7.00 level by 2032.
Fewer than one in four Americans (24%) want President Joe Biden to run again, according to a poll published on August 17th by the Associated Press. Even 55% of Democrats do not think he should run. As far as his approval rating is concerned, he remains one of the most unpopular presidents in American history. Meanwhile, he has allowed the Republican presidential front-runner to be charged criminally, who is now under indictment for 91 felonies in four criminal cases. RFK, the Spectator, proclaimed that “everything about him screams amusing sideshow rather than [a] serious contender.” They reduce him to “the country’s most prominent antivaxxer — a fringe role almost by definition.”
They seem oblivious to all the people who have been injured by the Pfizer vaccines and those who died. My own lawyer took the shot to show he could travel, got the blood clots, and now his doctor warns he should not fly. My neighbor had COVID-19 and was forced to get the vaccination to go on a cruise. The next day, the ambulance rushed her to the hospital, where she almost died at the age of only 27. Another man who works for me and his entire family gets seriously ill from any vaccine. These pro-vaccine people are ruthless, untrustworthy, and brainwashed. They should all be deported to California. We are NOT all clones. I hate to tell them there is NO constitutional authority to force medical treatment on any citizen.
The word circulating is that the Democrats are not very happy about the Big Guy. They are searching for a replacement, but the Neocons need another stooge. It cannot be someone anti-war. That is why they must defeat Trump, which will not be easy – they have made him an international martyr. I believe that the Neocons will assassinate Trump before his hand every hit the book to be sworn in. They will blame China to justify that we should wage war on China.
The Democrats are totally out of control. These charges against Trump are solely to interfere in the 2024 election. They are absolutely desperate to impose their tyranny and overthrow the people’s rights. This is only going to lead to the collapse of the United States. They have gone to the Supreme Court asking them to ORDER the lower court to allow TV cameras in and broadcast Trump’s trial like a soap opera to convince people not to vote for Trump. This proves this whole thing is to interfere in the 2024 election, which is frightening since our computer forecast that the 2024 election will never be accepted, which was 5 years ago.
As a student of Constitutional Law, I have read Blackstone, Coke, and Monesque. What they are doing to Trump is such a violation of the Double Jeopardy Clause because the courts have been so PRO-GOVERNMENT against the common people that the prohibition against being put in Double Jeopardy demonstrates the true tyranny that the American Legal System has devolved to. By creating numerous agencies, each passes a law prohibiting the same crime. The Supreme Court has refused to honor the spirit of the Founding Fathers, and the worst example is 91 felony counts against Trump for the same pretend crime.
Let’s say that three agencies outlaw killing your spouse. Each agency could then charge you with murder. Two out of three juries find you innocent. The third is pressured by the judge and rules in favor of the government. They will not be Double Jeopardy since they allow the definition of an offense to be a statute rather than the actual crime it is supposed to outlaw. Never in history have so many agencies and states been allowed to create a plethora of statutes prohibiting the same conduct that has allowed them to charge Trump with 91 counts for the same conduct. This is as if someone shot the same person and killed them, but they charge them for each bullet he fired as a separate murder, but there is only one person.
Many have written in and said I would have made a great Constitutional lawyer. If I had chosen such a path, they would have charged me with 91 counts of contempt and imprisoned me for life without a trial. I do not tolerate fools or tyrants. The concept of Double Jeopardy has a long history, but the American courts have seriously abused its development. Its meaning has been distorted to hand the government limitless power.
The English view of Double Jeopardy, under the influence of Sir Edward Coke (1552-1634) and William Blackstone (1723-1780), meant that a defendant at trial could plead former conviction or former acquittal as a special plea in bar to defeat the prosecution. ( Crist v. Bretz, 437 U.S. 28, 32–36 (1978), and id. at 40 (Powell, J., dissenting); United States v. Wilson, 420 U.S. 332, 340 (1975))
In this country, the common-law rule was, in some cases, limited to this rule. However, in other cases, it was extended to bar a new trial even though the former trial had not concluded in either an acquittal or a conviction. The constitutional prohibition against Double Jeopardy was intended to protect an individual from being subjected to the hazards of trial and possible conviction more than once for an alleged offense. Blackstone in his Commentaries, greatly influenced the Founding Fathers when they adopted the Constitution. Blackstone wrote:
“. . . the plea of auterfois acquit, or a former acquittal, is grounded on this universal maxim of the common law of England that no man is to be brought into jeopardy of his life more than once for the same offence.” id/Blackstone’s Commentaries 335.
If we look at the Supreme Court ruling BEFORE with this plethora of statutes and agencies, we find the same view was taken in Ex parte Lange, 18 Wall. 163, at 85 U. S. 169 (1873):
“The common law not only prohibited a second punishment for the same offence, but it went further and forbid a second trial for the same offence, whether the accused had suffered punishment or not, and whether in the former trial he had been acquitted or convicted.”
“The prohibition is not against being twice punished, but against being twice put in jeopardy; and the accused, whether convicted or acquitted, is equally put in jeopardy at the first trial.”
Before the court turned pro-government in the 20th century, it was being put in jeopardy twice, not that you could create ten statutes for the same crime. The underlying idea, one that is deeply ingrained in at least the Anglo-American system of jurisprudence, is that the State, with all its resources and power, should not be allowed to make repeated attempts to convict an individual for the same conduct, thereby subjecting him to embarrassment, expense, ordeal and compelling him to live in a continuing state of anxiety and insecurity.
The New Hampshire Constitution pt. I, art. 16 was adopted in 1784 and preceded the US Constitution, and it included a bill of rights that included the new nation’s first Double Jeopardy clause, stating: “No subject shall be liable to be tried, after an acquittal, for the same crime or offence (sic).” The Supreme Court of New Hampshire construes the Double Jeopardy prohibition of the state’s constitution to bar successive trials regardless of the identity of the initial prosecuting authority. State v. Hogg, 385 A.2d 844, 847 (N.H. 1978). The New
The text of the Constitution is also silent on many fundamental questions of constitutional law, including questions that its drafters and those ratifying the document could not have foreseen or chose not to address. Nonetheless, the philosophy behind the Fifth Amendment has long been settled, as stated in US v Ball back in 1896. Thus, it is one of the elemental principles of our criminal law that the Government cannot secure a new trial by means of an appeal even though an acquittal may appear to be erroneous. This has been the standard held in US v. Ball, supra; Peters v. Hobby, 349 U. S. 331, 349 U. S. 344-345 (1955). Cf. Kepner v. United States, 195 U. S. 100 (1904); United States v. Sanges, 144 U. S. 310 (1892).
We are looking at constructive amendment of the Constitution that there is ABSOLUTELY no possible way that the Founding Fathers would have allowed the same conduct to violate a multitude of statutes that would allow the government 91 chances to convict Trump for the same conduct. Not even the tyranny of King George III ever dared to get around the Double Jeopardy Clause in this manner. It is an embarrassment to the United States to the world.
Article VI, Clause 2:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
The Supremacy Clause in the Constitution (Article VU, Claus 2) prohibits no state from writing any law that overrules the federal law. Hence, no state may charge Trump for the very same conduct that he stands charged in a federal court. The Framers of the Constitution were silent on this idea of Dual Sovereignty in criminal law, and no court can rule in that favor without the 50 states having a go at the same conduct. Naturally, the Supreme Court would never entertain that argument because it would actually benefit the people – not our tyrannical government abuses. When 2032 comes, and we get to rewrite the constitution, there should NEVER be allowed multiple prosecutions for the same conduct regardless of how many sovereigns they want to pretend to exist.
The elevation of Double Jeopardy to fundamental status by its inclusion in several state bills of rights following the Revolution demonstrated its restraint against this type of abuse by the government. The Bill of Rights, which had been adopted at the New York Convention and transmitted to Congress with its ratification of the Federal Constitution, included a declaration that.
“no Person ought to be put twice in Jeopardy of Life or Limb for one and the same Offence, nor, unless in case of impeachment, be punished more than once for the same Offence.”
James Madison’s version of the guarantee, which was introduced in the House of Representatives, and it read:
No person shall be subject, except in cases of impeachment, to more than one punishment or trial for the same offense.
What we do know from the “intent” is that some Members opposed this proposal because it could be construed to prohibit a second trial after a successful appeal by a defendant. They viewed that as problematic. First, they argued that such a rule could constitute a hazard to the public by freeing the guilty. Second, they reasoned that prohibiting re-trials after successful appeals might make appellate courts less likely to reverse improper convictions (id/1 Annals of Congress 434 (June 8, 1789)). Ultimately, the language, barring a second trial, was dropped in response to these concerns. However, in Crist v. Bretz, 437 U.S. 28, 40 (1978) (dissenting), Justice Lewis Powell attributed this failure to broaden the Double Jeopardy Clause to incorporate the common law rule against the dismissal of the jury before the verdict, which remains a question the majority passed over as being of academic interest only.Id. at 34 n.10. This was what I mean that the Supreme Court has allowed the abuse of the Double Jeopardy Clause to the detriment of the nation, which we are now witnessing with Trump.
Unfortunately, we no longer believe in liberty in the United States. The same conduct may violate the laws of two different sovereigns, multiple agencies, and countless statutes that criminalize the very same thing by rephrasing it in myriad ways. This has allowed a defendant to be charged innumerable times until the government wins. The Trump cases will be the epitaph of the United States and the Rule of Law. It is over. We must wait for the body of liberty to be cold before she is buried.
After the Death of Nero and the Civil War that engulfed the Roman Empire, here we have the coin issued by one of the contenders, Vitellius, with the coin declaring the Restitution of Liberty.
They do not care about all the side effects and the number of people who have died. This is all about maintaining their control and power. So get ready for more lockdowns to suppress the rising civil unrest they anticipate will erupt because of their actions next year. As I warned previously, once they got away with the COVID Scam they would add this to their repertoire to impose it whenever they need to control the mob – we, the scum of the earth – the Great Unwashed.
Posted originally on the CTH on August 13, 2023 | Sundance
I was once asked by journalist Lee Smith to stand back, look at the total landscape, give my honest evaluation of the state of things, while defining the largest problem. My answer was immediate and deliberate….
We are living in an era of “Great Pretending.” That’s it. That’s the #1 issue that creates the angst, anxiety and suffering we all encounter. Perhaps a self-defense mechanism, but certainly, a psychological need to pretend things are something other than what they truly are. It’s everywhere, all around us, and it is almost painful to be one of the people amid the chaos who refuses to pretend.
Long after we are gone there will be people, perhaps not yet born, who will look upon this era and define it as this mysterious time when billions of people found it easier to pretend than face the reality of the precipice. It has been said that “ignorance is bliss,” but this is not that. This state of pretending is something far more insidious, far more dangerous, and yet acceptance of this pretending reality provides the stable non-pretending psyche with enhanced predictive insight for what comes next.
You might say those paragraphs sound awfully esoteric in value, somewhat difficult to fully contextualize without a solid frame of reference or example. Well, here’s an example of intentional pretending via CBS today. Catherine Herridge (EoS) knows the truth of the thing, yet she cannot share the truth of the thing; so, she pretends not to know the truth of the thing while softly bumping up against the acceptable pretending of the thing. Just watch the first 2 minutes and you will see it. WATCH:
As the pretending outline existed before, David Weiss could go anywhere he wanted to investigate and prosecute the Biden issue. A least that was the story from the Dept of Justice and even Weiss himself. Yet, for some rather mysterious reason, Weiss needed to ask for special counsel status. It’s all just an exhibition in parseltongue and pretending.
The DOJ is trying to protect the Biden family while simultaneously prosecuting their political opposition, Donald Trump. Toward that end, the special prosecutor against Trump asked for, and received, a secret court order for data from the Twitter account of Trump; their justification, Trump was a flight risk. Now think about that.
A secret, under seal, court order authorized under the justification of President Trump being a flight risk. The most famous man in the world, a man known by everyone on the entire planet earth, a walking human GPS system who literally has armed guards of the U.S. government following him around every day and documenting his every move, is considered a “flight risk”?
What level of pretending is needed to make that judicial justification seem rational? I digress.
As long as the era of great pretending remains the easiest psychological condition to survive the abuse, there will be no shift for people to look at their core beliefs and the fabricated world around them.
The challenge is getting those who understand the big picture dynamics to stop being comfortable and sticking their heads in the sand about “motive”. Most people are still clinging to beliefs around a principle of ‘rule of law’ that applies to national leadership writ large. We need to change that thinking quickly – or we will be left explaining ‘what happened’ far too late.
There is also a major issue with conservative “ushers” guiding the audience into a state of tactical numbness. A willful blindness within part of the American electorate, a chosen refusal to acknowledge the implications of the unAmerican and unconstititional actions we are seeing on a daily basis.
It can no longer be presumed to be a matter of, “I can’t see what’s happening”, because a whole lot of normal Americans really are clean and articulate. “I can’t see it”, just doesn’t cut it.
It’s more along the lines of, “I see what’s happening, but it’s scary and complicated and confusing, and if I admit that I see it, I will become responsible in a way that I am not if I keep pretending; I can’t see it or hear it, or maybe I don’t understand it.”
Why don’t we dare say what is so? Are we a bit afraid that if we give up the willful blindness we will perhaps start screaming and not be able to stop? Do we think we have so little courage? Do we really believe that we have no resources to bring to the battle – or nothing more to contribute to the turning of the battle?
If we stop pretending, we unite as a country, because we all start to accept the same baselines. The fraud, that has been purposefully deployed as a tool for fundamental change, can only exist if people pretend that fraud and corruption does not exist. Stop pretending, and the sunlight of commonality begins to unite our nation.
Believe me, and think about this with great serious reflection, the systems that are destroying us rely upon our continued pretending.
If you want to be a person of great influence in this current era, stop pretending. Start living, speaking, challenging and being direct and brutally honest when you encounter the need for pretending. Stop participating in the pretense, and you will see the natural outcome of a loving God elevate you.
We have the tools, resources and opportunity to speak with great resonance and clarity.
Speak truth!
Speak it loudly!
Speak it with resonance, clarity and great deliberateness.
Pfizer is part of 2032. They have so corrupted government on a global scale that has resulted in countless unreported deaths that our trust in government itself is crumbling before our eyes. Very few people are willing to stand up against this corruption. The politicians circle the wagons to protect their corruption. They will not succeed. Those who have lost family members because our politicians do not care if we die as long as they get paid will never forget.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 