There are major riots in just about every city in France over the validity of the election. Police are breaking up protests by using teargas on civilians. The youth especially are protesting for Macron wants to create an EU army and that will inevitably lead to drafts.
Never has that Machiavelli quote been more apropos than when considering the MAGA movement and the rise of Donald Trump.
Thankfully, we are now in an era when the largest coalition of American voters have awakened to the reality that, to quote the former president: “Economic Security is National Security.”
As we live through the economic mess of a Biden administration hell bent on eroding the middle class of the United States, there are numerous pundits contemplating 2024 Republican presidential candidates other than Donald Trump; consider this group the lukewarm defenders Machiavelli noted.
At the same time the leftist coalition, writ large, are apoplectic about the base of the Republican Party now belonging to Donald Trump. This group consists of those affluent Wall Street agents and politicians set on retaining the profits derived from decades of institutional objectives.
Institutional Democrats hate Trump, and institutional Republicans are lukewarm, at best, in defending Trump. Both wings of the DC UniParty fear Trump. Extreme efforts at control are a reaction to fear. In this outline, I rise to explain why Donald Trump is the only option for the America First MAGA coalition; and I make my case not on supposition, but on empirical reference points that most should understand.
Everything, is about the economics of it.
If you accept that at its essential core elements the phrase “economic security is national security” is true – meaning the lives of the American citizen, person, worker, individual or family are best when their economic position is secure – then any potential leader for our nation must be able to initiate policies that directly touch the economics of a person’s life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. As a result, economic security and economic policy must be the fulcrum of their platform.
Now, look around and ask yourself this question: “What separated Donald J. Trump from the remaining field of 17 GOP candidates in 2016?” An honest top-line answer would be immigration (border control), and his views on American economic policy. In essence, what set Donald Trump apart from all other candidates was his view on the U.S. economy, and that was the driving factor behind ‘Make America Great Again’, MAGA.
Now, look around. Look at every other potential candidate for political office. Is there another person in the field of your political view who comes from the starting point that economic security is national security?
Put aside all other issues and shiny things that may change from moment to moment as the political winds swirl and settle, and ask yourself that question. Who can deliver MAGA, if not the central person who lives, eats, sleeps and thinks about U.S. economic security from every angle at every second of every hour of every day. That’s Donald J. Trump.
Trump knows the extremely consequential sequence of BIG things that lead to a structurally strong American economic foundation.
We don’t have to guess at whether Trump can deliver on that policy sequence, we have reference points.
♦ Donald Trump knew that independent U.S. energy policy was a condition for a strong U.S. economy. He also knew there would be negative consequences to allies and partners if the U.S. energy policy was independent. Trump knew that OPEC nations in general would be negatively impacted, and he knew that Saudi Arabia specifically would be weakened geopolitically. That is why the very first foreign trip by Donald Trump was to Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States that make up the majority of OPEC.
Look at what President Trump did on that trip. First, he assured Saudi Arabia that the United States would stand with the Gulf Cooperation Council and Mid-East nations as it pertained to their security. Trump knew making the largest energy consuming nation independent from foreign oil would be adverse to the economic stability of the Mid-East, and as an outcome, could open a door to destabilization from extremist or ideological groups therein.
Take away top-line economic revenue from Saudi et al, and the leaders of those oil economies have a more difficult time remaining stable and controlling unrest and extremism. Generations of Arab citizens know nothing other than the trickle down benefits of oil exports. President Trump knew this, and he approached our need for energy independence by first assuring the Arab states of his commitment to their stability and safety.
President Trump delivered to those states a list of approved arms and defense agreements during that trip. In essence, what he was doing was putting the promise of security into actual delivery of tools to retain that security. Actions speak louder than words. President Trump also promised to work diligently on peace in the region; a real substantive and genuine peace that would provide security in the big picture.
Over the course of the next few years, Trump delivered on that set of promises with the Abraham Accords. Yes, economic security as national security applies to our allies as well as ourselves. Again, actions speak louder than words.
With the U.S. energy independence program in place, President Trump then moved in sequence to the next big thing.
♦ Donald Trump moved to face the challenge of China. A major shift in U.S. policy that is likely considered the biggest geopolitical shift in the last 75 years. Trump strategically began with Trade Authority 302 national security Steel and Aluminum tariffs at 25% and 10% not only toward China but targeted globally.
The entire multinational system was stunned at the bold step with tariffs. But remember, before Trump went to Saudi Arabia, he held a meeting with Chairman Xi Jinping in Mar-a-Lago. The global trade world was shocked by the tariff announcement, but I’ll bet you a doughnut Chairman Xi was not.
That February 2017 meeting, only one month after his inauguration, was President Trump graciously informing Chairman Xi, in the polite manner that respectful business people do, that a new era in the U.S-China relationship was about to begin. New trade agreements, new terms and conditions were to be expected in the future. The tariff announcement hit Wall Street hard, but not Beijing – who knew it was likely.
U.S. financial pundits proclaimed the sky was surely falling. These tariffs would cause prices to skyrocket, the global order of all things around trade was under attack by Trump. They waxed and shouted about supply chains being complicated and intertwined amid the modern manufacturing era that was too complex for President Trump to understand with such a heavy handed tariff hammer. Remember all of that? Remember how cars were going to cost thousands more, and beer kegs would forever be lost because the orange man had just triggered steel and aluminum tariffs?
Did any of that happen? No. Of course it didn’t. Actually, the opposite was true and no one could even fathom it. Communist China first responded by subsidizing all of their industries targeted by the tariffs with free energy and raw materials, etc. China triggered an immediate reaction to lower their own prices to offset tariffs. Beijing did not want the heavy industries and factories to start back up again in the U.S, so they reacted with measures to negate the tariff impact.
China’s economy started to feel the pressure and panda was not happy. Eventually, as the tariffs expanded beyond Steel and Aluminum to other specific segments and categories, China devalued their currency to lower costs even further for U.S. importers. The net result was something no one could have imagined. With lower prices, and increased dollar strength, we began importing all Chinese products at cheaper rates than before the tariffs were triggered. Yes, we began importing deflation. No one saw that coming…. but Trump did.
While all that initial U.S-China trade shock was taking place, Donald Trump took his next foreign trip to… wait for it…. Southeast Asia.
Just like in the example of the trip to Saudi Arabia, economically-minded Trump told partners and leaders in the export producing countries of Japan, Malaysia, South Korea, Vietnam, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and ASEAN nations to prepare for additional business and new trade agreements with the U.S., as factories inside China might start to decouple. Look at how they responded, they did exactly what Trump said would be in their best interests.
To seriously gather the focus of this SE Asia group, President Trump started direct talks with North Korea and Chairman Kim Jong-un for peace and regional stability. It’s easy to forget just how stunning this was at the time, but generations of people in Asia were jaw-agape at the U.S. President confronting China, engaging with North Korea, and opening his arms to new trade deals with ASEAN partners.
On the world stage of geopolitics and global trade, any one of these moves would be a monumental legacy initiative all by itself. But together, simultaneously, you can see how the entire continent physically stopped midstride and stood staring at this, this man, this American President, who was just about to step across the Demilitarized Zone in North Korea and shake hands with Chairman Kim…. and, wait for it…. they are smiling.
√ Energy security triggered and friends in Mid-East supported.
√ Mid-East peace initiatives triggered.
√ A return of heavy industry and manufacturing security triggered.
√ A confrontation of Chinese economic influence triggered.
√ Stability between South Korea and North Korea, triggered.
√ New trade deals and economic partnerships with Japan and South Korea, triggered.
And then, as if that was not enough… just as multinational investment groups started realizing they needed to change their outlooks and drop the decades long view of the U.S. as a “service driven economy”… just as they realized they needed to start investing domestically inside the United States for their own growth and financial security… as if all that wasn’t enough… President Trump kicks off an entirely new trade deal and renegotiated standard for all North American trade via NAFTA.
We don’t have to guess at whether Donald Trump can put together a program to ensure Economic Security is National Security. We don’t have to guess at whether Donald Trump can deliver on economic policy. We don’t have guess if Trump’s policy platform, proposals and initiatives would be successful. We have the experience of it. We have the results of it. We have felt the success of it.
We also don’t need to guess at who is the best candidate to lead Making America Great Again, we already know who that is.
There is no other 2024 Presidential Candidate, who I am aware of, who could possibly achieve what Donald John Trump has achieved, or who could even fathom contemplating how to achieve a quarter of what President Trump achieved.
Do not tell me Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is a better option. DeSantis is an unknown commodity, a blank slate, when it comes to big picture economic outlooks. DeSantis doesn’t have an economic agenda inside his administration from which to contemplate or analyze his economic views.
Governor Ron DeSantis has a lot of really good skills and policies on the domestic front unique to his position in Florida; however, it is not a slight toward him to point out he has never expressed any larger economic proposal that would give any confidence in a national economic policy.
Look at the sum total of it, and there’s so much more that could be outlined to what Donald Trump achieved and could yet still achieve, it’s not even a close question.
And that my friends is exactly why Donald Trump is under relentless attack from both wings of the UniParty in DC. Additionally, it is clear the Wall Street Republicans are trying to position Ron DeSantis as an alternative to another Trump term. Look carefully at the current advocates for DeSantis, Nikki Haley and/or Kristi Noem, and you will note every one of those early voices are attached to favorable Wall Street politics and multinational corporate advocacy.
Look at what Donald J. Trump was able to achieve while he was under constant political attack. Just imagine what Trump 2.0 would deliver.
They, the leftist Democrats and Wall Street Republicans, are yet again absolutely petrified of that.
TrialSite chronicled the efforts of Dr. Jackie Stone in Zimbabwe during the worst stages of the pandemic. Born in Zimbabwe, Dr. Stone has been fascinated by research since a young age, and her commitment to caring for people during the pandemic has been legendary. While her off-label ivermectin-based combination regimen was identified with the saving of many lives in this southern African country, the medical establishment isn’t too keen on thinking outside of the box, even during the worst pandemic in a century. Dr. Stone now faces a court trial with criminal charges for merely treating COVID-19 patients with an early outpatient treatment protocol based on a combination of off-label treatments that includes ivermectin. This, even though Dr. Stone treated many in the Zimbabwe government and military successfully. In fact, for a while, the Medicines Control Authority of Zimbabwe (MCAZ) authorized access on an emergency basis for research—which amounted to care in this low-and middle-income country. The regulatory agency did a turnaround with ivermectin due to the results in the clinic of Dr. Jackie Stone.
Articles about Dr. Stone and Zimbabwe can be found at TrialSite. A fighter to the end originally of English and Norwegian descent, curious, and tough, yet elegant and empathetic, she grew up in the bush in this part of Africa, as her father was involved with geology and mining. Dr. Stone’s ethos, integrity, and commitment to doing good should have led her to awards from groups such as the World Health Organization.
Stone recently got together remotely with TrialSite’s founder Daniel O’Connor to discuss her concern with the Together Trial. While mainstream media have pounced on the findings, at least a dozen physicians and scientists are findings various issues with the data.
Ed Mills, the principal investigator, did the right thing investing his time as well as raising money to study repurposed drugs. While the Together trial’s primary endpoint failed to show efficacy for ivermectin, even Mills went on the record in a private email declaring ivermectin proponents should be upbeat about some of the data generated in the study. But Mills’ data was taken by mainstream media and used as a weapon to attack the use of the drug worldwide. This isn’t Dr. Mills’ fault–again he took the time to investigate the drug as well as other important repurposed drugs.
But Stone’s concern centers on the needs of low and middle-income countries (LMICs) for low-cost, available regimens for early care. Stone told TrialSite, “in poor and up-and-coming countries we don’t always have the luxury of waiting around for gold standard evidence. Rather, in the case of the pandemic, we need to move fast, and we did, leading to the saving of many thousands of lives.”
She continued, “My concern now is that papers such as the New York Times or Wall Street Journal pounce on data, often misinterpreting quotes from the PI can lead to a cutting off of life-saving approaches in LMICs such as my country.”
“Dr. Stone’s commitment to LMICs cannot be denied based on a clear track record of success. With COVID-19 came politics around the use of off-label drugs such as ivermectin, and unfortunately, Dr. Stone is caught in the middle of a political battle, but she is one of the most resilient individuals I have ever come across,” reports TrialSite’s O’Connor.
Dozens of scientists and doctors now pour through data of the Together Trial. Recently, Dr. David Wiseman, affiliated with TrialSite, shared a dozen bullet points of concern associated with Together, including inputs from Dr. Flavio Cadegiani and others that TrialSite poses as questions.
Together Trial Questions: Ivermectin
| # | Question/Concern Issues for Discussion with Together Trial |
| 1. | Did the ivermectin arm of Together run later than the placebo arm, a time when a more virulent strain was present in that part of Brazil? |
| 2. | Why wouldn’t the protocol call for screening for ivermectin use—after all the drug was used in many parts of Brazil. Were those participating already using the drug? It would be hard to prove now. |
| 3. | The critics fret about the lack of reported boosts in gastrointestinal side effects in the ivermectin arm leading to what they believe is a fundamental problem with the study—either A) placebo group was on ivermectin or B) those taking ivermectin were not administered real study drug |
| 4. | Were these placebo pills produced to look identical to the study drug? As the drug is commonly used, this would have unblinded the study. |
| 5. | Together used ivermectin alone yet the early care community uses the drug in combination with other economical safe drugs such as antibiotics, steroids, as well as nutraceuticals such as vitamin D, C, and zinc. The study of ivermectin alone doesn’t mean much to frontline doctors. |
| 6. | Together started up to 8 days post symptom onset, but frontline ivermectin proponents declare the drug should be given immediately upon symptomatic infection. The P.1 variant also saw a faster progression to severe illness only compounding the problem. |
| 7. | In the Together study, they used a dose of (0.4 mg per kilo per day) which many critics called inadequate for ill patents–was the study underdosed? |
| 8. | Given ivermectin proponents suggest using the drug till symptoms are resolved, why did the Together protocol only call for use for 3 days? |
| 9. | Why did the protocol call for administration of the drug on an empty stomach when proponents declare the drug works best when associated with consumption of fatty food? |
| 10. | Why is so much basic data missing from the study results such as Recruitment Period, Recruitment Locations, Recruitment and allocation order per sit, Description of how the molecules and placebo were produced or compounded to look identical (otherwise loss of blinding); why is there missing age data for 98 patients? Other gaps in data or anomalies are present for those interested |
| 11. | Some basic math shows that the numbers listed in the trial paper for the different arms and outcomes in the trial do not add up to the totals and percentages that they give – either a gross mathematical error or fraud. To see many of the strange mathematical discrepancies which invalidate the trial conclusions, go to investigative journalist Phil Harper’s article: Moreover Wiseman declares And the alteration of the death count in the trial data raises serious questions: |
For all of those interested in Dr. Stone’s story check out the many articles published in TrialSite along with this important letter authored by Dr. Eleftherios Gkioulekas, Professor of Mathematics Undergraduate Program Coordinator at The University of Texas — Rio Grande Valley School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences in Edinburg, Texas.
Call to Action: TrialSite suggests a fund to support Dr. Stone in her legal battle if needed.
Recently scientists from Denmark led an important study suggesting that mRNA-based vaccines such as the ones made by Pfizer or Moderna may not be as safe as adenovirus-based vaccines such as Johnson and Johnson, AstraZeneca/Oxford or the one produced by China’s CanSino Biologics. Led by Peter Aaby, a trained physician and anthropologist that runs a health and demographic surveillance system site in West Africa as part of the Bandim Health Project and Dr. Mihai Netea a well-known award winning Romanian/Dutch scientists and Danish colleagues from Odense Patient Data Explorative Network (OPEN) at University of Southern Denmark, the group scrutinized possible “non-specific effects” (NSEs) of the COVID-19 vaccines probing into overall mortality such as not only COVID-19 deaths but also accidental deaths, cardiovascular deaths and other non-COVID-19 deaths. The team discovered that out of 74,193 participants in mRNA clinical trials and 61 deaths, that based on relative risk there was no real difference between the vaccine and placebo group. While in the adenovirus-based studies with 122,164 participants and 46 deaths the vaccine had nearly half the level of deaths as compared to the controls group.
The study team decided to take a step back and look at the COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial data from a different point of view. They did this because “there is now ample evidence that vaccines can have broad heterologous effects on the immune system.” Such effects can either A) greater protection or B) increased susceptibility to unrelated infections or even other non-infectious autoimmune diseases. The authors report that emerging study data reveals that “vaccines may have completely unexpected effects on overall mortality, different from what could be anticipated based on the protection against the vaccine-targeted disease.”
The study results await peer review thus the data shouldn’t be considered evidence. But the novel approach and consequent findings represent an important potential contribution to our scientific knowledge of the COVID-19 vaccines.
Taking a different perspective, Dr. Aaby and team share that the current batch of COVID-19 vaccines were not tested to evaluate their effects on overall mortality. That would have been difficult given the short follow-up in the studies as subjects participating in the control groups received the vaccine after 3-6 months based on the emergency use authorization situation.
Surprisingly, although all would assume that the COVID-19 vaccines would reduce overall mortality in the pandemic this assumption hasn’t been formally vetted in studies.
The authors utilized the final study reports available from the COVID-19 vaccine trials investigating the impact of mRNA and adenovirus-vector COVID-19 vaccines on overall mortality, including the previously mentioned other categories such as cardiovascular-related deaths.
The table below highlights these study findings:
| Participants | Deaths | Relative Risk | |
| mRNA | 74,193 | 61 (mRNA 31; placebo; 30) | 1.03 (95% CI=0.63-1.71) |
| Adenovirus | 122,164 | 46 (vaccine: 16; controls:30) | 0.37 (0.19-0.70) |
Aaby and team report that the adenovirus-vector vaccines were associated with protection against COVID-19 deaths (RR=0.11 (0.02-0.87)) and non-accident, non-COVID-19 deaths (RR=0.38 (0.17-0.88)).
Of note, mRNA-based vaccines differ markedly from adenovirus vaccines regarding impact on overall mortality (p=0.030) as well as non-accident, non-COVID-19 deaths (p=0.046). The placebo-controlled RCTs of COVID-19 vaccines were halted rapidly due to clear effects on COVID-19 infections. Importantly the data derived from this study suggest an important need for randomized controlled trials of mRNA and adeno-vectored vaccines head-to-head comparing long-term effects on overall mortality.
Of course, many experts may summarily dismiss such findings as not relevant. After all the COVID-19 studies were designed to determine if the vaccines were effective in protecting against death from SARS-CoV-2, the virus behind COVID-19. Yet the authors point out that “non-specific effects, and their immunological basis, have been established for several other vaccines.” For example, the authors point to randomized controlled trials showing that BCG vaccine against tuberculosis (TB) lessens neonatal mortality, yet this was because the vaccine protects against deaths from sepsis and respiratory infections.
They point out that “immunological studies have shown that such effects are indeed biologically plausible; BCG positively affects the innate immune system leading to enhanced resistance towards a broad range of pathogens. Furthermore, the BCG vaccine has been associated with decreased systemic inflammation.”
The authors conclude that if their findings are in fact validated by randomized controlled studies then the adenovirus-based vaccines may prove beneficial to their “protective heterologous effects…on non-COVID-19 mortality” as well as their effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection. Could these vaccines represent an advantage in vulnerable populations susceptible to cardiovascular mortality. Key is a better understanding of the heterologous effects between the different vaccine types.
Dr. Allen Schapira funded the work on non-specific effects of vaccines while some of the previous work was funded by the Danish Council for Development Research, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Denmark; Novo Nordisk Foundation and European Union.
Peter Aaby, DMSc, Bandim Health Project, INDEPTH Network; Bandim Health Institute – OPEN, Institute of Clinical Research
Christine Stabell Benn, University of Southern Denmark – Odense Patient Data Explorative Network (OPEN); Bandim Health Project, INDEPTH Network
Frederik Schaltz-Buchholzer, Statens Serums Institut – Bandim Health Project
Sebastian Nielsen, University of Southern Denmark – Odense Patient Data Explorative Network (OPEN)
Mihai G. Netea, Radboud University Nijmegen – Radboud Center for Infectious Diseases (RCI); Radboud University Nijmegen – Department of Internal Medicine
Related
Study: mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Pose ‘Rare but Serious’ Threat
UK Health Security Agency Reports Mixed Vaccine Effectiveness Stats—Troubling Signals
Explore Further
First Look at Newly Released Pfizer Docs, Part 2: The ‘not necessary’ safety studies
Write for us – we are expanding our list of external authors
April 11, 2022 | Sundance | 256 Comments
When voices ask why it is important to keep reminding people of the events over the past two years surrounding COVID-19 and the western government response, the short answer is ‘THIS IS WHY’…. {Direct Rumble Link Here}
Watch as Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau decries the “recent rise in authoritarianism” and then denounces the subsequent “populism” that surfaces as an exact consequence of the government going too far. Trudeau stands there explaining why it is necessary to support Ukraine, having exited his echo-chamber, and pretends there is no comparison between western government authoritarianism and that of Vladimir Putin who he decries. WATCH:
It really is critical for this moment of profound inflection in our history, to look at these statements and remember what they have done.
Those words from Justin Trudeau are from the same prime minister who locked down his citizens, forbid travel, mandated forced medical procedures, refused to allow transit without government approved certificates of vaccine compliance, arrested the non-compliant, and instituted unilateral rules and regulations without citizen feedback or support. Then he banned political protest against his mandates, invoked emergency war powers to target his own citizens, arrested protest groups and then confiscated the bank accounts of his political opposition.
CTH will never let this go. CTH will never forget. CTH will never stop reminding of the well documented actions by national, regional and local officials, including the neighborhood cops. We will never forget. There needs to be a reckoning.
The professional political leftists are starting to rebrand themselves as having fallen victim to the “bureaucracy of COVID”, and according to those high-minded people who think very highly of themselves, we are supposed to embrace this new enlightenment from the same people who were demanding our acquiescence to their dictates.
It’s not just Trudeau, almost all western government leaders are now trying to pretend they did not grab unilateral and autocratic powers against their own citizens. They are pointing toward the splinter in the eye of Russian President Putin, while thinking, believing, we do not see the plank in the eye of the western rulers. Quite remarkable.
We are expected to appreciate the same people who demanded our acquiescence to every policy that was created by their ridiculous fear, simply because they now admit ‘oops, my bad‘? Sorry, not happening.
For two years they shoved their intolerant fingers in our faces, destroyed lives and livelihoods, made ridiculous demands in order to sustain their own fear, threatened our children, destroyed the economy, used COVID as an excuse to destroy families and steal an election, attempted to force us to kneel at the altar of their mask wearing and never-ending vaccine crap… and we’re just supposed to what, forgive them?
Fat chance.
We do not stand alone. That sound you heard was millions of our brothers and sisters locking the door, turning around to face them, and now the reckoning is about to begin.
We need to see these people destroyed.
The vulgar lies and verbal filth have been extreme for two years as these ideological parasites utilized their power, microphones and stenographers typeset in a brutal attempt to tear down our nation. We have all been witness.
Anyone trying to convince us this assembly of our union is not tenuous might want to revisit their proximity to reason, because they’re not just out of the city – they’re also out of the same state the ballpark is located in.
David Mamet had a famous saying, I repeat it often because it helps people break the cycle of abuse. Essentially: …‘In order for democrats, liberals, progressives et al to continue their illogical belief systems, they have to pretend not to know a lot of things’…
By pretending ‘not to know’, the professional left carries no guilt, no actual connection to conscience. Denial of truth allows easier trespass, and that is exactly what Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is attempting in that soundbite.
This hate-filled leftist ideology relies on our willingness to reconcile their presentations and grant benefit within their seeds of doubt.
It is time for ‘cold anger‘ to turn hot.
We need to destroy those who carried out this abuse.
Our parents were forced to die alone in isolation while we were forbidden from holding their hand or being with them. Thousands never had the opportunity to say goodbye.
We know exactly what the covenant of marriage is all about, and it has nothing to do with being forced to stand outside hospitals, screaming in unbearable choking anguish, while our wives and husbands took their last breaths…. ALONE!
You want forgiveness for that?
I do not even remotely possess that capacity. I seek vengeance.
I refuse to give any “coming to the right side” credit to the vile, intolerant, hate-filled and insane leftists who demanded all the totalitarian bulls**t they now pretend was not futile nonsense. Trudeau, Macron, Ardern, Morrison and yes, Biden et al, should be shunned, mocked and cast into the pit of irrelevance.
The high-minded, reach-across-the-aisle Republican crew can continue bleating philosophically about how we must grow our ranks by accepting the newly found recalcitrance of those who have carried out this nonsense. However, this constant granting of benefit to those who abuse us is the epitome of battered conservative syndrome.
Professional apologists for the right wing of the UniParty can keep trying to make the vulture a better sandwich in the hopes that eventually it will stop abusing us. Meanwhile, prudent people, those slow to anger but resolute upon arrival, accept the leftists and Democrats for who they are, toxic abusers intent on destroying the liberty and freedom the aisle-reachers claim to cherish.
The professional political left would like nothing more than their victims to be comfortable forgiving them for their openly hostile attacks. Within that dynamic, the abuser is free to repeat the cycle, and make no mistake – they will repeat the cycle, eventually.
Actions have consequences. We are not fast to the sentiment of hate; we know the damage that sensibility can create within oneself. However, eventually, reluctantly, decisions are reached.
Those who perpetrated these two years of hell need to be held to account, and unfortunately, this type of accountability is so severe in consequence there can be no quarter provided or terms which might provide even the most remote possibility of a reoccurrence.
It is uncomfortable to accept that our response needs to be of such severity that our children will be witness to a visible anger they did not know their parents were capable of. But witness they must if we are to ensure these vile and intolerant leftist creatures are destroyed forever.
I would rather provide the opportunity for my children to forgive me, than to see them forever living in a hopeless land of totalitarianism where freedom and liberty have been dispatched from their lives. At least in the former their choice is possible.
The professional political left must be destroyed with extreme prejudice.
Americans are still tolerant and patient people, the most compassionate and generous people in the history of all mankind, but we are also very purposeful. They could have stopped with us, but they did not. Instead, they came for our children.
When pushed far enough, hard decisions are reached…
And they have pushed us much further than simply ‘far enough‘.
Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s attempt to mandate vaccinations for everyone over 60 was blocked by Parliament in a 378-296 vote. The bill would have forced all Germans over the age of 60 to receive three vaccinations before October 1, 2022.
The Social Democrats (SPD), Free Democrats (FDP), and Greens were all pushing this bill forward and will likely continue to fight for a mandate. If Parliament did not vote in favor of the people, this would have opened the floodgates to endless vaccination mandates for the entire population. Under the failed bill, unvaccinated Germans would have been required to attend a doctor consultation to discuss (coerce) them into getting the vaccine.
Health Minister Karl Lauterbach also recently reversed his stance on self-quarantine restrictions. Lauterbach initially said that the 10-day isolation rule would end on May 1. “I have withdrawn the proposal because the completely wrong impression would have arisen that either the pandemic is over or the virus has become significantly more harmless than was assumed in the past,” he stated. In other words, he does not want the people to feel safe as that would diminish the need for big government and Big Pharma.
They want to force injections on the people without erasing existing restrictions because they know the vaccine is ineffective. Parliament’s ruling comes as a silver lining, but the fight for medical freedom is far from over.
As expected, in the France election no candidate achieved 50% of the vote. That sets up a runoff election fifteen days from now to determine who will be the next president. Reuters Article Here – Guardian/MSM Article Here
In the primary race the final results are not yet announced; however, current President Emmanuel Macron has approximately 28% of the vote, and challenger Marine Le Pen has around 24% of the vote. No other candidate was close enough to change the top two outcome.
In the head-to-head matchup, the race is essentially tied, well within the margin of polling error (as above). Interestingly, Le Pen has flipped the 18-to-34-year age bracket and now holds majority support in the younger voting bloc. Perhaps, due to young French citizens feeling the outcomes of the professional political left thirsting for unilateral power during COVID.
There was around a 65% voter turnout according to most early analysts. The general election is essentially a coin toss based on the current polling. The final vote to determine the winner will take place April 24th. It will be a very closely watched event by leaders around the world. A Le Pen victory would be seismic in the world of politics, akin to Trump’s victory in 2016, and that outcome is a strong possibility.
The professional political left are apoplectic.
(BBC Opinion) – Estimations from round one show how tactical voting rewrote the electoral map.
Voters gathered into three broad camps: Macron, the far-right and the far-left. In the last days of campaigning, many people who were considering other candidates finally decided that they would rather back a frontrunner.
There was thus a big transfer of votes from Éric Zemmour – the hard-right nationalist pundit – to the camp of Marine Le Pen. Some right-wingers in the conservative Republicans party may have done the same.
On the left, voters decided that neither the Socialist Anne Hidalgo nor the Green Yannick Jadot could ever make it into round two. So they shifted massively to Jean-Luc Mélenchon, simply to keep a leftist in the race. This despite many Socialists and Greens actively disliking the man.
And in the centre, many who would normally have chosen the Republicans’ Valérie Pécresse will have plumped instead for the incumbent. Why? Because they were genuinely afraid that Le Pen and/or Mélenchon were coming up too strong from behind.
The result means two things.
One is the utter devastation facing France’s two traditional parties of government since 1958 – the conservative right, and the socialist left. This was a process started by Macron five years ago, but now comprehensively complete.
Both parties’ candidates – and certainly the Socialists’ Anne Hidalgo – may have failed to reach the 5% threshold, which allows them to claim back election costs. The price tag will be millions of euros, but worse is the ignominy. We can expect serious internal ructions.
Macron has so engineered it that the divide in French politics is now definitively the one that he sought: between his own “realistic centrism” and “openness to the world” and the “extremism” of his opponents. The “nationalist extremism” of Le Pen and the “utopian extremism” of Mélenchon. (read more)
During his pandemic response, Macron went totally overboard. He was the first one to announce (July 2021) that a vaccine passport would be needed in order to shop, drink, eat at restaurants, travel or worship. Many other western, fascist totalitarian dictators, the new democracy leaders, followed soon thereafter. Macron’s ideological fiats may come back to haunt him. We can hope. The French people were not happy with this unilateral decision, and it showed people how quickly some leaders will become dictators.
President Macron took that dictatorship even one step further in January of this year, and this is likely the biggest problem for him right now. In January he announced that any unvaccinated person was “irresponsible” and therefore “no longer a citizen.”
Macron told Le Parisien that he had decided to act against the non-vaccinated, by “limiting as much as possible their access to social life activity”. “The unvaccinated, I really want to piss them off. And so we will continue to do so, to the bitter end. That’s the strategy,” the head of state said. “When my freedom comes to threaten that of other people, I become irresponsible. An irresponsible person is no longer a citizen.”
“I am not going to put them in prison, I am not going to forcibly vaccinate them,” Macron went on. “Therefore you have to say to them: from January 15 you can no longer go to a restaurant, you can no longer go for a drink, you can no longer go for a coffee, you can no longer go to the theatre, you can no longer go to the cinema,” the president said. (read more)
That extremist approach is the opening Marine Le Pen now has in front of her – to expose Emmanuel Macron as the installed, WEF approved, multicultural economic globalist everyone knows him to be.
To get a better context for the catastrophic and dangerous war zone that is Ukraine, yesterday European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Commission Vice President Josep Borrell Fontelles visited President Zelenskyy in Kyiv {link}. The primary purpose of the meeting was to affirm the intent of the EU to accept Zelenskyy into the Union.
Earlier today, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson also went into the war zone, toured the extreme chaos and battleground, and met with Zelenskyy (video below).
(Via MSM) – The UK is to send 120 armored vehicles and new anti-ship missile systems to Ukraine, Downing Street announced Saturday, after Prime Minister Boris Johnson paid an in-person visit to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
Johnson and Austria’s Chancellor Karl Nehammer made separate visits to Zelensky on Saturday, the latest in a string of leaders to travel to the country during the ongoing Russian invasion.
Johnson posted on Twitter that his visit to Kyiv was “a show of our unwavering support for the people of Ukraine” and announced a new package of financial and military aid.
“Ukraine has defied the odds and pushed back Russian forces from the gates of Kyiv, achieving the greatest feat of arms of the 21st century,” the UK PM said in a statement.
He praised Zelensky’s “resolute leadership” and the “invincible heroism and courage of the Ukrainian people,” adding that the UK “stands unwaveringly with them in this ongoing fight … we are in it for the long run.” Later in his nightly address posted on social media, Zelensky thanked the UK and Johnson. (read more)
As seen in video promoted by the NATO alliance, Johnson and Zelenskyy ignored the threat of bombs, missiles and artillery that could be raining down upon them, and bravely walked without flak jackets, vests or even helmets despite the chaos.
Unfortunately, the cinematography produced by the western NATO alliance failed to capture the smell of burning diesel fuel from the aftermath of hundreds of tanks and weeks of street-to-street urban warfare. However, it does appear that Johnson was prepared for hand-to-hand combat if any angry shopkeeper stepped out of line. Courage is, as they say, contagious. Footage below:
These people are against Democracy where the people make decisions. Republics are authoritarian regimes in sheep’s clothing. They run pretending one thing and then do everything in their power to accomplish undemocratic goals.
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!
De Oppresso Liber
A group of Americans united by our commitment to Freedom, Constitutional Governance, and Civic Duty.
Share the truth at whatever cost.
De Oppresso Liber
Uncensored updates on world events, economics, the environment and medicine
De Oppresso Liber
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
Australia's Front Line | Since 2011
See what War is like and how it affects our Warriors
Nwo News, End Time, Deep State, World News, No Fake News
De Oppresso Liber
Politics | Talk | Opinion - Contact Info: stellasplace@wowway.com
Exposition and Encouragement
The Physician Wellness Movement and Illegitimate Authority: The Need for Revolt and Reconstruction
Real Estate Lending
Centinel2012 