QUESTION: There has been talk that Trudeau will use the fires to claim a climate crisis, and that will justify lockdowns again. Is there any truth to these rumors?
FS
ANSWER: There is definitely the idea of using climate change to justify lockdowns. However, this is really not for climate change but for crowd control. They are well aware of the rising discontent civilly, which historically produces revolution. They are pushing for world war III for two reasons.
First, it will be the excuse to default on all sovereign debt as they are also attracted to the Schwab-Soros solution of a one-world government. If that is the case, then all previous sovereign debt will be null and void. The United States did that with the debt of the Continental Congress when they created the United States. That’s why you can collect the revolutionary currency that was never honored.
Secondly, they fear revolution is in the wind. In order to prevent that from taking place, they need to restrict all travel, censor social media, and lock us down using climate change as the excuse.
You may not know it, but at the Paris climate summit, they REFUSED to allow anyone to testify who disputed their agenda. That was the start of this Cancel Culture. The Guardian published the truth, perhaps ahead of schedule. There are those pushing for lockdowns every two years to meet the Paris requirement of ZERO CO2. Everyone’s future is to change, and they never ONCE allowed anyone to ever vote on this agenda. These people understand that civil unrest is on the rise. They desperately need a diversion. Russia is providing that for now.
Video
Will people support this war against Russia and draft people to go to Ukraine? Will that be the turning point? Are you willing to send your children or yourself to fight for Ukraine over the Donbas, which is the home to Russians, not Ukrainians, for hundreds of years when it does not impact our lives? They know there will be resistance. If it is too great, you will suddenly see the need for climate change lockdowns.
Posted originally on the CTH on June 19, 2023 | Sundance
Attorney Robert Barnes does a good job framing the motive of the DC administrative state, specifically the Lawfare ideologues currently in control of the DOJ, to create a precedent to usurp constitutional power by targeting President Trump.
A little more than a week before Special Counsel Jack Smith released his indictment against President Trump, Andrew Weissmann, Norm Eisen and fellow lawfare travelers, wrote an internal prosecution memo for current Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco to use on behalf of the conscripted Special Counsel. [SEE 186-page Guidance MEMO HERE]
When Jack Smith revealed his indictment in Florida, not accidentally it was almost identical to the guidance memo that Weissmann had written. Even the novel use of the Espionage Act was identical in format to the outline by Weissmann, Eisen and their crew.
[NOTE: In the post 9-11 surveillance state, this approach by the DOJ-NSD is a pillar holding the Fourth Branch of Government in place, as we have outlined. The other pillars are (2) the Dept of Homeland Security, (3) the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and (4) the secret FISA Court system. All four pillars maintain an omnipotent fourth branch of government that operates entirely without oversight. As you can see in the 11th Circuit Court ruling, there is no check or balance in the post 9-11 national security state.]
Essentially, what we are witnessing is what Lawfare researchers would expect.
The Lawfare operatives, represented by Weissmann, Eisen and company, are all ideological agents connected directly to the anti-Trump efforts. Their ally in the DOJ is Deputy AG Lisa Monaco.
I use the term “Lawfare” to describe their general group association, as well as the actual organization funded by the Brookings Institute that carries the same name.
Essentially, Lawfare et al, are the group of current and former Dept of Justice ideologues that we find throughout the deployment of all Main Justice weaponization, activism and corruption.
The Muller team were all Lawfare members. The legal team in/around the accusations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, what Christine Blasey-Ford called “beach friends,” are all Lawfare members. The legal team behind both of Trump’s impeachment efforts were all Lawfare members. It is one large network of legally minded ideologues working toward a common goal; they are inside government and connected to the same DOJ minds outside government.
The second thing they have in common is their collective risk within their action. Many of their activities were/are unlawful (spygate, FISA, Mueller probe, impeachment background etc), so to the extent the Lawfare group can mitigate risk by attacking anyone who would be a threat to them, this is what we see.
Andrew Weissmann and Norm Eisen are two of the most well-known members of this politically motivated group. Together they have created novel legal theories to use by the DOJ against their political opposition. They write the legal filings for Main Justice to use inside government.
The fact the DOJ uses these novel theories and legal filings in the actual practice of law and prosecution shows how deeply connected the outside Lawfare group is to the Lawfare group inside DC.
Much of their Lawfare approach, that is using the law as a weapon, is based on a goal of attrition. Wear down the target until they are eventually destroyed. The same approach and motive is intended toward the supporters of the target. Wear down the psyche of the target’s supporters until they too are destroyed.
Creating demoralization is a very familiar approach from the Saul Alinsky methods rulebook. It is another way to create fear through isolation, ridicule and marginalization of their opponent. Threatening to make any defender a target is exactly the key behind Andrew Weissmann’s entire tenure as a prosecutor. You will note, they did this Lt Gen Mike Flynn when Weissmann expanded their scope and then threatened Flynn’s son, Mike Flynn Jr.
On June 2, 2023, Andrew Weissmann and Norm Eisen published their “Model Prosecution Memo” for use inside the DOJ and for the legal scribes in media to review prior to the DOJ making any Trump indictment announcement. {SEE MEMO HERE} This is the same playbook they have used successfully in the past to get all of their allies on the same page for the preferred narrative.
Anticipating that Lisa Monaco would then be distributing the talking points and giving Jack Smith the groundwork for his upcoming novel indictment effort, Andrew Weissmann then appears on MSNBC to discuss.
So this shows that Comey is now officially a part of the Lawfare group that is outside the US DOJ and is throwing out a dog whistle for those inside the DOJ to start getting their resistance setup. pic.twitter.com/WRMLc4HUBz
— Positive Comrade Ziiggii (@realZiiggii) June 5, 2023
Posted originally on the CTH on June 17, 2023 | Sundance
One of the ways you can immediately detect federal Lawfare deployment is to look at how media articles are written when they outline court filings without direct citation for review. The Hill began SEE HERE. The New York Times is similar, SEE HERE.
Notice both national publications talk about a DOJ court filing, presumably made under seal, that limits President Trump’s defense access to materials and documents used in the case against him. Notice the media do not say how they gained insight into the details of the sealed filing itself; nor do they provide any source context for how their reporting is structured. Nothing like, “according to sources with familiar with the matter” or anything similar. Just nothing; no attribution at all.
That media context is a BIG red flag indicating the need to ‘create a narrative’ is more important than the actual substance of the evidence material underpinning it.
Both stories hit on the issue of the DOJ filing a (presumably sealed) motion with the Florida court, to place limits, rules and restrictions on evidence against President Trump, that limits his ability to review it, talk about it and/or provide context for it. THIS IS A LAWFARE MOVE. This is what happens in the prosecutorial star-chambers where they hide information in order to create the appearance of something nefarious, where nothing nefarious exists.
When we see this legal approach, we can be assured the case that uses the evidence is built upon fraud and pretense. Do not be afraid to tell your family, friends and others about this dynamic. President Trump is being accused of the crime of violating 18 U.S. Code § 793(e) – Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information, a violation of the espionage act, and the DOJ is requesting that President Trump must not permitted to defend himself by discussing the evidence against him.
The DOJ wants to limit public knowledge of the material evidence, not because it would harm national security – but rather because the nature of the evidence itself would highlight to the nation how fraudulent the targeting is. This is the guaranteed DOJ motive, that’s why everything is under seal and even the media will not talk about how they are gaining their leak knowledge. This is LAWFARE narrative engineering at its apex deployment.
WASHINGTON DC – The Justice Department on Friday filed a motion seeking to block former President Trump from releasing any classified materials that will be shared with his legal team during his prosecution for the mishandling of records at Mar-a-Lago, noting that some are still being used in the course of their investigation.
The documents “include information pertaining to ongoing investigations” which could be used to further cases against uncharged individuals, the Department of Justice (DOJ) wrote.
The suggested protective order, which will be reviewed by Judge Bruce Reinhart, would allow Trump to review the 31 documents the DOJ is using in the case only while in the presence of his attorneys.
“Defendants shall only have access to Discovery Materials under the direct supervision of Defense Counsel or a member of Defense Counsel’s staff. Defendants shall not retain copies of Discovery Material. Defendants may take notes regarding Discovery Materials, but such notes shall be stored securely by Defense Counsel,” the DOJ wrote.
It also includes similar language to a protective order agreed to in another Trump case that bars the former president from disclosing evidence in the case. New York state prosecutors made that request as they pursue a 34-count indictment of Trump relating to a hush money scandal.
“The Discovery Materials, along with any information derived therefrom, shall not be disclosed to the public or the news media, or disseminated on any news or social media platform, without prior notice to and consent of the United States or approval of the Court,” the department wrote. (read more)
Watch this interview with Devin Nunes and Kimbery Guilfoyle – Start at 06:40 listening to Nunes:
I am correct about the documents grabbed.
I am correct about the nature of the DOJ/FBI intentions and motives.
I am correct about the Lawfare manipulation of the material to present the illusion of illegal where nothing illegal is taking place…
…and I am increasingly certain that Mary McCord is part of TEAM Jack Smith!
Wait for it!
The first two defense approaches will likely be: (1) the Presidential Records Act supersedes the issues of document holding as noted in the use of the Espionage Act. (2) However, if the Espionage Act [Statute 793(e)] has to be defended, the originating issue of “unauthorized possession” will be the second approach heading to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Some baselines are needed to understand what is happening.
First, the National Archives and the DOJ did not demand a return of Classified Documents. They requested a return of documents containing classification markings. These are two entirely different things.
Most documents containing classification markings are not classified documents; yet, most classified documents contain classification markings. Additionally, one of the documents used by Jack Smith in his indictment [COUNT #11] contained no markings at all.
Second, it is critically important to remember that throughout the legal issues in the aftermath of the Mar-a-Lago raid, the DOJ has viciously denied any responsibility to describe the classified documents they claim to have retrieved. In fact, the DOJ has fought against any entity, including the court appointed “special master”, from being able to look at the documents the DOJ *previously* claimed were either classified, or, vital to national security. {GO DEEP}
Because there is a very specific type of Lawfare taking place with words, it is critical to see the value in what former HPSCI Chairman Devin Nunes has stated about the way the language is being deployed. Now we turn to the testimony of the national archivist office, and here is where it gets really interesting.
♦ During testimony to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) officials were asked specifically about Trump documents and how they could *KNOW* fulsome return of documents had not taken place. The response from the NARA officials is enlightening:
Notice that NARA had knowledge these documents were in the possession of Trump and were pertinent to their archive retrieval. It was interesting at the time that NARA would know the content of the President Obama letter, and further interesting they would know there was more than one piece of correspondence between President Trump and Chairman Kim [Jong-un]. CNN even wrote about it HERE.
[Irrelevant note: Mr Bonsanko got the name wrong, Jong-il is dead]
Reminder, keep in mind the DOJ ferocity in not wanting anyone to know what documents they retrieved and/or defined.
We know, from President Trump describing the letter left to him by the former president, that Obama told Trump in the letter that the number one foreign policy and intelligence threat perceived by Obama (at the time of his exit) was a nuclear armed North Korea. This is where you overlay the Jack Smith writing in the indictment of national defense secrets and nuclear security issues.
We know, from President Trump speaking publicly about his communication and diplomacy with Chairman Kim Jong-un, that the two leaders exchanged letters relating to aligned national security interests that centered around DPRK nuclear ambitions and status.
Trump and Kim formed a geopolitical truce, a friendship of sorts, based on respect and trust around the nuclear issue. Chairman Kim decreased hostilities; President Trump no longer used inflammatory language about “Little Rocket Man.” A diplomatic détente was created.
NARA was looking for the letter written by Obama that described DPRK nukes, and NARA was looking for letters between Trump and Kim that touched on DPRK nukes.
Now, does the wording in the Jack Smith indictment that pertains to “nuclear concerns” and “national security matters” make more sense?
Would all of this “nuclear national defense” hullaballoo really stem from President Trump not giving up personal letters written to him by President Obama and Chairman Kim? YES! Would President Trump even characterize those letters as government property? NO!
♦ The indictment accuses President Trump of withholding documents containing “classified markings,” a very specifically deployed obtuse wording intended to create the implication of something nefarious where nothing nefarious exists. It is entirely possible for a person, any person, especially a person who follows the news, to possess documents containing “classified markings.”
There is a big difference between a classified document and a document containing classified markings. As an example, anyone who has looked at the Carter Page FISA application, made public in July 2018, has reviewed a document containing “classified markings.” When a document is declassified, they do not remove the markings.
This language is the underpinning of the entire DOJ/FBI framework that predicated the raid on Mar-a-Lago. Specifically, neither NARA nor the DOJ-NSD requested President Trump or his team to return Classified Documents. The DOJ demanded the return of any documents that contained “classified markings.” [SEE BELOW]
Because the verbiage is so intentionally obtuse (ie. Lawfare), a fulsome production in compliance with this DOJ demand would include any newspaper or magazine articles that had a picture of the Carter Page FISA application, or any printed online article that might contain the same or similar elements. There is a big difference between asking for a classified document return, and asking for a return of documents that contain “classified markings.”
Can you see the way it unfolds? Of course, when you apply the Lawfare lingo, an approach entirely based on maintaining the targeting of Trump, then suddenly the seemingly innocuous becomes horribly nefarious.
In order to pull this off two things would be needed: (1) the DOJ would need to write about it in a certain way in the indictment√; and (2) simultaneously, the DOJ would need to stop anyone from viewing the actual documents, as they misleadingly described them√. Hey, wait… that’s exactly what they did.
♦ In a previous court ruling by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, the court ruled in favor of the U.S. Dept of Justice – National Security Division (DOJ-NSD), and blocked the lower court order instructing a Special Master to review the DOJ claimed, “classified documents.” [pdf Ruling Here]
Essentially the order of the appellate court was based on the DOJ defining Trump’s Mar-a-Lago documents as “classified” and “vital to national security”, and the court’s determination said they have no authority to question the decision of the executive branch when it comes to how they DEFINE matters of national security.
The court (judicial branch) openly stated they defer to the DOJ (executive branch) regarding any/all claims of harm to national security that may be caused by a review of documents the DOJ-NSD determined, on their own authority, to be identified as classified or matters of “national security.”
In the prior opinion of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, if the DOJ states sharing the “classified documents” with a special master may harm national security, the court must accept that position without challenge and stop the special master review.
The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals did what the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) does with the DOJ-NSD and any matters defined by the originating Main Justice officials as “national security.” The 11th Circuit is deferred to the DOJ.
The DOJ was granted legal benefit of the doubt on all matters of national security, which puts the DOJ-NSD in ultimate control over the star chamber they operate.
This ridiculous ruling meant the DOJ could define any document as a document of “national security interest” and there is no countervailing review of their definitions. As soon as this decision was reached the DOJ then moved to appoint a special counsel. Can you see how this works?
With this ruling in his briefcase, Special Counsel Jack Smith could now define the Mar-a-Lago documents according to the legal intention of his targeting. That’s exactly what he did. The case against Trump is not a case about classified documents, it is a case about the DOJ defining unilaterally what documents are considered “vital to national security.”
With the DOJ getting to define those documents, the special counsel then moves to claim national security threats created by Trump’s ownership. The overlay of “vital to the nuclear capabilities of the defense dept,” can then be shifted to include letters from President Obama and Kim Jong-un about DPRK nuclear capabilities.
America seems to have lost all true allies. Once the world police, the US has been expected to “save” democracies worldwide since the First World War. The US pledges more to NATO than any other member and has gifted Ukraine endless supplies to protect Europe from “Russian aggression.” Yet, a new poll states that Europeans would not want to back America in a war against China.
Six thousand people were surveyed from Austria, Bulgaria, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, and Sweden. Only a quarter of respondents said they’d “like their country, or Europe, to take America’s side,” while 62% would like to remain neutral. Around 43% said China is a “necessary partner” to the EU, and they must “strategically cooperate” with Beijing. Bulgarians were the most likely to side an alliance with China (8%) and/or consider the nation a “necessary partner” (58%). Swedes were the most willing to support the US, with 26% calling China an adversary. About 31% of Poles also said they would side with America if they were to go to war with China.
What will happen to America’s allies when China becomes the more strategic trading partner? American politicians have destabilized our economy and are attempting to steer away from capitalism. Countries will be lining up to sell to China, and not the US.
In the end, it does not matter. The people are never permitted to vote on whether or not we go to war. Most of us, regardless of nationality, simply want peace. We all want to have enough to live comfortably, which is not an option during wars. They ask us to sacrifice, but for what? Our politicians create conflict and send the people, who never had a say in the first place, into battle to die.
If China enters Taiwan, the world will erupt into chaos. The neocons have been waiting for that very moment to justify a new war. Every NATO member nation would be required to fight China. A Gallup poll from February showed that 65% of Americans wanted to support Ukraine against Russia, but they likely do not realize what it entails. We are not merely giving Ukraine supplies; we are preparing for a worldwide battle. In the end, the people are merely cannon fodder and I hesitate to show any support to a politician who believes war is the only option for conflict resolution.
Posted originally on the CTH on June 9, 2023 | Sundance
In the Trump indictment the DOJ is not, repeat NOT, arguing a classified documents case. The entire legal framework is centered around documents they define as vital to the defense security of the United States. EVERYTHING is predicated on this 18 U.S. Code § 793(e) violation:
18 U.S. Code § 793(e) Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it.
According to the Trump indictment, COUNT #7 – page 29, a document “concerning communication with the leader of a foreign country” is considered a classified document in violation of US Code 793, vital to national defense interests.
Do you want a historic example of this exactU.S. Code § 793 violation taking place?
(Sept. 11, 2012) – ”Denis McDonough, Deputy National Security Advisor, left, updates the President and Vice President on the situation in the Middle East and North Africa. National Security Advisor Tom Donilon and Chief of Staff Jack Lew are at right.” (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza) [SOURCE]
In Joe Biden’s hands are the notes of a phone call, taken by then Vice-President Biden, recording the conversation between Barack Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as recorded on September 11, 2012. [The night of the Benghazi, Libya, attack on the U.S. Consulate]
The push toward net zero emissions contains a sinister undertone – depleting our food supply. Ireland announced that they will murder 200,000 cows to adhere to Agenda 2030, ultimately reducing cow cattle by 10% in the coming years. Adding to the push for Universal Basic Income, Ireland is telling farmers that they can murder their livestock as a “retirement exit scheme,” decreasing the number of available farmers altogether. This outline will reduce available dairy and meat in Ireland, but demand will not decline, forcing the country to rely on costly exports.
Why are they targeting agriculture? Pat McCormack, president of the Irish Creamery Milk Suppliers Association, told reporters that the agriculture industry is no larger than it was 25 to 30 years ago. “Can the same be said for the transport industry, can the same be said for the aviation industry?”
This plan will cost Irish taxpayers $213 million annually. The government claims it is voluntary for now, but that will depend on how many farmers adhere to this plan and abandon their livelihoods. Once upon a time, cows were actually sacred in Ireland and appeared in numerous folklore stories. I’ve mentioned before that two groups that often overlap, animal rights activists and climate change activists, are at odds over the treatment of animals in the name of reduced methane emissions.
The Irish potato famine or the “Great Hunger” lasted from 1845 to 1852 – one million people starved to death. History repeats. Not only are they killing cattle, but they’re buying up farmland and reducing the availability of fertilizers. The push to diminish our food supply is occurring throughout the West, and the goal is to “reduce emissions,” aka the food supply by 2030, in accordance with Agenda 2030.
COMMENT: Martin, I’m gay and I agree with you on this transgender drivel, especially letting male-born athletes compete in women’s sports. It is becoming scary for those of us who are just gay. We are being thrown in the same category as this transgender agenda. I too have been to Thailand. The Ladyboys in Thailand are numerous and are accepted in society. They are smart enough to not make a political issue of it as is taking place here in America.
As for your view of Trump as the only hope to save our politics, I profoundly disagree. I think he is arrogant and ignorant. He doesn’t care if what he says if it is true or not.
CP
REPLY: With respect to Trump, you have to separate the individual from the politics. I understand people hate Trump. The media have spread this BECAUSE he is a threat to the Washington political establishment. Nonetheless, not even Trump can stop the decline and fall of Western Civilization.
People get offended by his crude statements at times. But at least you know what he really thinks. Is it better for a career politician to say everything you want to hear and then look at you as a stupid fool and do the opposite?
I have worked in Washington. There is ABSOLUTELY nobody who is a career politician in either party who will really stand up for the people. They are under pressure all the time to conform to the unelected party bosses.
I have met many heads of state in my 40 years. I have said the truth. Trump was the ONLY such person who ever impressed me as actually being human. His statement that he wanted to bring our boys home from Afghanistan because he was tired of writing letters to their parents to thank them for their son’s sacrifice of dying for his country. He actually said what are we doing there? They are fighting over borders for a 1,000 years. What difference will we make?
No head of state EVER spoke about the people. It was always about their policy. I have come to see that we are just the pawns – expendable pawns at that. There are always more of us to come. They look down upon the people as stupid scum. This whole digital currency thing is to track everything we do.
So you may find Trump’s statement and his arrogance at times as distasteful. We will never find someone perfect. But all of this is irrelevant. For there is NOBODY coming on some white horse to save the day. Trump’s quality was that he was NOT a career politician and what he was doing was for his personal legacy from ending wars to building a wall to protect our borders.
So all I can say is to those who hate Trump so much, you better look closely at the others for they have nothing but contempt for you.
Back in the ’70s, I hired a death mute – Danny. He taught me sign language and we could communicate and laugh together. I had a major surgeon as a client and he said that he probably could restore his hearing. I offered to pay for everything for him and he declined. He was afraid to hear sounds. He grew up that way and was in his late 20s and did not want to change. He taught me that what I thought would be a generous offer was really just me thinking that normal was the ability to hear. We cannot judge others by ourselves.
One of our staff who is black, was rather upset about the whole Black Lives Matter movement. She explained that it was being usurped by non-blacks. There was clearly a strange agenda behind the curtain. Soros and his defund the police agenda was to create civil unrest and cause the country to get prepared for this one-world government.
Ruth Bader Ginsberg was the first woman to make it to the Supreme Court. She was an advocate for women’s rights. But she came out and explained that the entire Abortion Movement was a fraud. They called it women’s rights and have indoctrinated many women who passionately take that position. They have been cleverly manipulated by the Gates crowd and the Rockefeller Foundation for their real goal was to reduce the population. Gate’s father started the whole Planned Parenthood and placed them in minority areas to reduce their population on a racist basis. Like his father, Gates has targeted Africa to reduce population.
Now, the total number of people who identify as Transgender is 1.6 million out of a population of 331.9 million (2021). That is 0.0048%. Now, how has this become such a major issue? There is absolutely NO WAY this Transgender group had the money or the clout to turn this into such a huge issue. Diving deep behind the curtain and you will find, just like abortion, it is being funded for the purpose of reducing the population – and has NOTHING to do with Pride or gay rights. They are being exploited just as women were told it was their right to have an abortion – kill that baby and save the planet.
This Transgender nonsense is in fact destroying the right of the Gay Community because they are being thrown in with this Transgender nonsense advocating changing children’s sex without parental knowledge all before puberty. Let’s get real here. This agenda is to promote the reduction in the population and has NOTHING to do with the Gay Community or their rights to inclusion and equality.
This is always the same strategy – manipulating society to achieve its undeclared goal be it war, politics, or women/transgender rights. It is like LIFE Insurance which is really DEATH insurance. They sell fire, accident, theft, and hurricane insurance. But they could not sell DEATH insurance so they called it LIFE insurance and people brag how much they have.
Video Player
00:00
00:55
Remember the lockdowns? The whole COVID nonsense was a scam to end commuting and terminate offices bringing in virtual work from home all to reduce gas consumption. That was also a manipulation of society for climate change – not for health. There are people still to this day wearing masks driving alone in a car. They have been mentally damaged by these tactics.
NOTHING is ever what it seems. We are the fools and they are always using sophisticated tactics to manipulate society to achieve objectives that they will never reveal.
It’s just time to take the Red Pill and wake up if you EVER hope to survive as a viable human being or take the Blue Pill and live in your fantasy that government actually cares about you.
Posted originally on the CTH on May 27, 2023 | Sundance
Last night I participated in a conversation. This article is written as an outcome of that conversation, as requested by those who participated.
Essentially, the framework of the conversation, as I initially listened, is best described as a series of questions amid a group of smart intellectual types who are very understanding of the nature of our current situation.
In various forms they were asking each other the same question. What happened in the last several years that caused Democrats, leftists and the traditional political left to switch positions on their advocacy?
Liberalism literally went from railing against Big Govt, to embracing corrupt Big Govt. Why and how did this happen?
In short, it was the same line of questioning I have seen asked by Tucker Carlson, Glenn Greenwald, Tulsi Gabbard and various traditionally liberal people as well as people on the right side of the continuum.
Why and how did traditional liberalism so suddenly flip from being, big picture – ‘anti-government’, to suddenly embracing corrupt government enterprise, and supporting the intelligence apparatus, federal govt (writ large), institutional oppressive law enforcement and FBI etc.? What happened?
After listening to this conversation quietly, as I am prone to do, my remarks -with citations and examples- silenced the room.
At the conclusion of my remarks, everyone asked me if I had ever written about this, and if not – why not? I did not have an answer, so consider this a promise fulfilled. Perhaps you might find value.
In the 50 years that preceded 2008, traditional leftists, media activists, left-wing community organizing agencies, Democrats, liberals, progressives, or whatever label you want to assign, essentially railed against the U.S. government and all that it represented. However, now, if you were to look at the issues from the 30,000-foot perspective, those same groups currently support the oppressive & weaponized system of government they formerly despised.
In the 50 years that preceded 2008, those same groups had an approach of distrust toward government, and the media apparatus had a very distinct supportive and cynical outlook, favorable to the leftist anti-government perspective. Now, all of that has reversed – seemingly flipped.
In the 50 years that preceded 2008, media pushed a one-way narrative in defense of those who were “targeted” by the institutions and mechanisms of government. As the activists railed against the regime, the media framed narratives to excuse the transparently guilty. Now, that entire dynamic has reversed. Now we see the media pushing a narrative in support of weaponized government targeting, and – here’s the kicker – framing the transparently innocent.
The activists went from accusing government of wrongdoing and defending the transparently guilty – to aligning with government, excusing government wrongdoing, and helping to attack the transparently innocent.
As some continue to say with jaw agape, WTF happened?
The answer “why” is not complicated…. not complicated at all.
In 2008, the ‘activists’ took control of government.
In January of 2009, the leftists, community organizers and activists took control of the systems they had opposed for the preceding 50+ years.
In January of 2009, and inflection point took place; an inflection point that no one realized in forethought, scale or consequence.
Starting in 2009, all of the systems of federal government were now under the control of the people who previously fought against the systems of federal government. Everything since is an outcome of that inflection point; that’s why everything flipped.
All of it, and I do mean every scintilla of the thing; every single granular detail and example you can put in front of me can be traced back to that moment when the activists were no longer outside government railing against the corrupt system they hated.
Starting in January of 2009, the activists took power over the United States government, and every outside institution, including media, necessarily and ideologically followed that inversion.
Starting in 2009, the systems and institutions of the U.S government now came under the control of the radical activists.
In the eight years that followed, the mission of every institution was changed. Government was weaponized on behalf of the leftist activists who now took control of it. Everything thereafter is a consequence of this change.
When I use the word “suddenly”, it is only for understanding the inflections point that came as a consequence. In actuality, the severity of change inside each institution took place over several years. That’s why the intensity of the weaponized and corrupt systems became worse over time.
As each institution was infiltrated to become more aligned with the mindset of the activists, the institutions became more radical in their targeting and weaponization.
The activists went from being outside government to being inside government.
Suddenly, the left-wing supportive media changed mission priority from railing against corrupt government, to defending the corrupt weaponization of govt.
Suddenly, the FBI went from targeting domestic threats, to targeting only the domestic threats defined as against the interests of the left-wing activists.
Suddenly, the outside activists went from being defined as social elements creating turmoil, to social elements now being defended and even promoted.
This is why we see outside activist groups like the Dream Defenders, New Black Panthers, Black Lives Matter, Occupy Wall Street and more recently ANTIFA, as protected and supported by the activists inside government now in control of the systems and institutions.
All of the social, cultural and political dynamics that changed traditional “liberalism” are easily understood once you realize and accept that activists took control of the power centers of the U.S. government.
Everything that followed, including our current state of social and political turmoil, is simply a natural conclusion of that fundamental change.
The radical activists are now in control of the institutions of power. This core shift is what created the dynamic of a very visible two-tiered justice system. Each institution was weaponized and continues to be weaponized against those who are not aligned with the activist ideology.
The Dept of Justice has been weaponized against people who are not in alignment with the radicals.
The federal police, known as the FBI, have been weaponized against We The People.
The Intelligence Community is now under the control of the radical activists. The mission priorities change accordingly.
When Tucker Carlson, Glenn Greenwald, Tulsi Gabbard or any other person posits the question about ‘why’ the ideology of the left and media has shifted so suddenly, there is your answer.
It is not a complicated understanding. Once you accept this fundamental change took place, everything seemingly falls into place….
…. At least that’s what the “ah-ha” audience told me.
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 