America’s Social Credit System Is Worse Than China’s
Gregory Hood • November 13, 2020 • 3,400 Words

China is notorious for a “Social Credit System” that controls the lives of citizens, rewarding what the authorities want and punishing what they don’t. The United States has a social credit system, too, even if we don’t call it that. And ours is worse.

The Chinese system tries to build social trust. Ours destroys trust. The Chinese system defends the interests of the Han, the ethnic group that built and sustains Chinese civilization. Our system hurts whites. The Chinese system encourages charity, good citizenship, and patriotism. Ours incites hatred and spreads bitterness and division.

The Chinese government’s goals are clear: According to a 2014 planning document, the state wants to build a “social credit environment of honesty, self-discipline, trustworthiness, and mutual trust.” Despite the reputation of the Chinese Communist Party, there is no central system of control, but that is only because the government lacks the capacity. According to the 2014 plan, by this year, China should have “basically” completed “a credit investigation system covering the entire society with credit information and resource sharing.”

Vox reports China has a grading system for people from A to D. Ds are “untrustworthy.” “Citizens can earn points for good deeds like volunteering, donating blood, or attracting investments to the city,” said the MIT Technology Review in 2019. “They can lose them for offenses like breaking traffic rules, evading taxes, or neglecting to care for their elderly parents.” Taking seats on public transportation reserved for old people or doing anything the South China Morning Post called “uncivilized behavior” can also cost points.

January 17, 2018 – Rongcheng, China: So-called model citizens are depicted on a board, who reached a particularly high score. (Credit Image: © Andreas Landwehr / DPA via ZUMA Press)

January 17, 2018 – Rongcheng, China: So-called model citizens are depicted on a board, who reached a particularly high score. (Credit Image: © Andreas Landwehr / DPA via ZUMA Press)

You can lose points for playing video games too oftenbuying too much alcoholarguing at check-in countersboarding a train without a ticketgetting into a fightposting stickers hostile to the governmentor letting chickens out of their coop. You can lose your dog if you walk it too often without a leash or if it bothers people. NPR reportsthat “if you spread rumors online” you could lose points, and even “spending frivolously” can cost points. The system punishes some things just as we do in the United States. If you drive drunk in China, you lose points. If you drive drunk in America, you can lose your license.

How does the system find out all this about you? The Chinese track people through a combination of cameras, facial recognition software, spies, and data from tech and social media companies. There are an estimated 626 million security cameras in China, capturing all sorts of behavior. The Straits Times reported that cameras caught a citizen jaywalking, recognized her face, and immediately put her photo up on a video screen above the street, along with her name and past infractions. The Chinese use drones disguised as birds.

There are groups of paid government informers. In one case, a group of senior citizens called the Chaoyang Massessupposedly tracked behavior, though some people thought the group was questionable. This could be a feature of the system; you don’t know who is watching. The New York Times reported in 2019 that the government uses students to track professors.

Companies such as Alibaba and Tencent track your online activity, and you can lose points if you publish political opinions without permission or talk about certain issues such as Tiananmen Square. You also lose points if your friends commit infractions; collective punishment helps isolate dissidents and discourage others. However, you can gain points if you parrot the government line. Some of this is self-reported and checked against data held by the government, tech companies, and surveillance records. There is an app called Sesame Credit that lets you track people’s scores. It is voluntary for now but will eventually be mandatory.

July 30, 2016 – Shenzhen, Guangdong, China – Chinese tech giant Tencent is now the world’s 10th biggest company. Most people likely know the company for its social network, WeChat, which has become completely intertwined with life in China, along with its online gaming platforms. (Credit Image: © Imaginechina via ZUMA Press)

July 30, 2016 – Shenzhen, Guangdong, China – Chinese tech giant Tencent is now the world’s 10th biggest company. Most people likely know the company for its social network, WeChat, which has become completely intertwined with life in China, along with its online gaming platforms. (Credit Image: © Imaginechina via ZUMA Press)

“Trust-breakers” go on an online “blacklist” that anyone can search. “Trust-keepers” go on an equivalent “redlist.” Everyone’s behavior is public, and the authorities encourage citizens to compete with each other to get good scores.

Good citizens can get discounts on energy bills, better returns on bank deposits, and can rent bikes or hotel rooms without paying deposits. Local officials praise them publicly. In Suzhou, “trust-keepers” get cut-rate public transportation.

Depending on the locale, if your credit score reaches 600, you can take out an instant loan of about $800 without collateral when shopping online. At a score of 650, you can rent a car without a deposit. At 700, you get priority for a Singapore travel permit, and at 750, you are on the fast track for a coveted Schengen visa for 28 European countries.

Punishments include banning you or your children from top schools, barring you from top jobs and the best hotels, and preventing you from buying high-speed train or air tickets.

Businesses also get grades on, for example, whether their advertising is deceptive. If their grades are too low, they can’t issue bonds or bid in land auctions.

There’s a financial aspect to the system. It costs points if a person or business fails to repay a loan. We have credit scores, too. The difference is that the Chinese government can — and does — deduct points for political reasons. It could cut a business or family out of normal activity for saying the wrong things. Your social credit “grade” could wreck your life.

January 17, 2018 – Rongcheng, China: Posters of ‘model citizens’ are put up in front of the citizen centre. (Credit Image: © Andreas Landwehr / DPA via ZUMA Press)

January 17, 2018 – Rongcheng, China: Posters of ‘model citizens’ are put up in front of the citizen centre. (Credit Image: © Andreas Landwehr / DPA via ZUMA Press)

If the system is fully imposed, it would be terrifying to be a D. China does not yet have a centralized, all-encompassing system. Different government agencies, localities, regions, and private companies share information and have different programs, rewards, and penalties. Two years ago, Foreign Policy explained that “unless people are sole proprietors or company representatives, have taken a loan or credit card, violated the law, or defaulted on a court judgment, they’re unlikely to be in the social credit database.”

China wants to get all 1.4 billion people into the system. Since China routed the Hong Kong autonomy movement, the system will surely spread there too. “All regions and departments should have ideological unity,” says the plan.

China is working hard in two areas that will help it control its people. The first is artificial intelligence to manage vast amounts of data. The United States and China are competing in AI systems, and that battle could help determine who rules this century. Collecting enormous amounts of data on citizens will mean finely detailed control.

The second area is digital currency. China is already experimenting with a digital yuan. Most people in China already usemobile apps for transactions, not cash. A full record of transactions, combined with AI, means tremendous government power to track individual behavior and modify social credit scores.

A “cashless,” total-social-credit China could be a prison. It would mean no unauthorized buying or selling, no political opposition (“ideological unity”), and little privacy. However, citizens would be forced to fulfill basic duties such as taking care of families and paying bills. They would be rewarded for helping their communities. The Chinese Communist Party would succeed in turning the people it rules into typical petit bourgeois with conservative norms.

The Chinese government wants to “broadly shape a strong atmosphere in the entire society that keeping trust is glorious and breaking trust is disgraceful . . . .” In other words, China wants a high-trust society.

Diversity destroys trust, as white advocates often point out. China is working to overcome this problem by replacing Tibetans and Uighurs with Han Chinese. The government is also Sinicizing these areas, especially by suppressing Islam. A faithful Muslim should rebel against these policies, but a Han Chinese sees this as protecting national interests.

Xi Jinping, President of China, can be seen on a video wall in the western Chinese city of Kashgar. Strict security measures are in place in the oasis city, making reporting difficult for journalists and affecting the lives of Uighur minorities. (Credit Image: © Simina Mistrenau / DPA via ZUMA Press)

Xi Jinping, President of China, can be seen on a video wall in the western Chinese city of Kashgar. Strict security measures are in place in the oasis city, making reporting difficult for journalists and affecting the lives of Uighur minorities. (Credit Image: © Simina Mistrenau / DPA via ZUMA Press)

We have the equivalent of a social credit system in the United States. It just has different incentives. You can lose your job for a politically incorrect remark caught on camera. Political dissidents find they can no longer use PayPal or even banks. Twitter bans people with whom it disagrees, while users with verified accounts can make threatening or violent statements.

“Spreading rumors” or “conspiracy theories” is cause for social media to boot you. Some journalists spend time hunting down people who spread “conspiracy theories.” If journalists or trolls decide that your small business or video channel needs to be deplatformed, they can complain to tech companies, and once you are off, there is no appeal. For many people, that means loss of livelihood.

Power-hungry people invent new forms of social credit all the time. Democrats have started a Trump Accountability Projectso that Trump supporters can “never serve in office, join a corporate board, find a faculty position or be accepted into ‘polite’ society.” With a remarkable new website called Donor.Watch, you can find out exactly how much your neighbors (or anyone in the country) gave to any of the 2020 candidates. The tools are there for Democrats to set up shaming mobs to harass or intimidate Trump supporters.

Social media, which let ordinary people express themselves and were originally to be bastions of free speech, have taken it upon themselves to determine what is official information. Even now, Twitter is censoring President Trump, and Facebook is removing Trump supporters and their groups.

You can’t cast an informed vote or express yourself if you can’t learn or speak the truth. In his book Deleted, Allum Bokhari showed Google’s power to direct information, sway votes, and bury stories it doesn’t want covered. While the Democrats often say tech companies don’t censor enough, they at least recognize their power. A House Judiciary Committee report recently found that Amazon, Alphabet (Google/YouTube), Apple, and Facebook use monopoly power to suppress competition. President Trump’s Department of Justice recently suedGoogle, calling it the “gatekeeper of the Internet.”

Conservatives banned from the big platforms can go elsewhere, but what happens when Parler and Gab lose their payment processors or servers or even their bank accounts? Will we have to build our own banks and internet?

Source: Stonetoss, October 30, 2018

Source: Stonetoss, October 30, 2018

Our system is not exclusively punitive. The American system encourages banks to lend to non-whites with doubtful credit. There is a broad set of incentives to promote minority — especially black — bank ownership, even as black banks keep going under because they keep lending money to dubious black borrowers.

Social media openly promote Black Lives Matter, and every minority cause, holiday, and celebration. Book sellers direct you to endless titles on anti-racism and white privilege.

Unlike the Chinese version, American social credit is not state run and is even less centralized than China’s. However, it’s not true that the state has no involvement. Acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Kevin McAleenan admitted in 2019 that although the government cannot act as a censor, it expects to work with tech companies and “watchdog groups” to force ideas it doesn’t like off the internet.

The Republicans have done hardly anything about this. An American president is relatively weak, and unlike Xi Jinping, can’t issue orders through the bureaucracy and expect obedience. Perhaps President Trump lacks the will. Kamala Harris, probably the next vice president, appears to have plenty of it. She wants to give the FBI millions of dollars to “more vigilantly monitor white nationalist websites” and “put pressure on online platforms to take down content that violates their terms and conditions.”

June 11, 2019 – Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey speaks to Entrepreneurial Refugee Network members to discuss how technology is opening up new opportunities for refugees breaking barriers in the UK. (Credit Image: © Matt Crossick / PA Wire via ZUMA Press)

June 11, 2019 – Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey speaks to Entrepreneurial Refugee Network members to discuss how technology is opening up new opportunities for refugees breaking barriers in the UK. (Credit Image: © Matt Crossick / PA Wire via ZUMA Press)

Under a Biden/Harris White House, the partnership between state and media would therefore grow stronger. Like Chinese officials, many Democrats and journalists take it for granted that not only traditional media should promote certain stories and suppress others, but “open” social media should do the same. The American system increasingly resembles the Chinese, with ideology imposed from the top.

We do not have single-party rule in the United States, but we do when it comes to white interests. Republicans and Democrats unanimously blamed “White nationalists, white supremacists, the Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazis and other hate groups” for violence at the Unite the Right rally in 2017 — as if antifa were not even there — even though local officials deliberately forced demonstrators and antifa together so that violence would be an excuse to shut down a legal rally. There may be two parties, but both agree that whites must not promote their collective interests in the streets or online.

Just as the Chinese system punishes people for associating with low-scoring trust-breakers, the media and “watchdog” groups love to publicize “links.” The Washington Post recently revealed in an indignant article that a Trump Interior Department official had linked to an article at AmRen.com. American dissidents routinely use pen names, and “respectable” people keep their relations with them secret.

In some respects, an openly authoritarian government is better than our system. It’s clear who is in charge. Citizens know who rules them. It’s easier to remove a tyrant because you can always march on the palace or the party HQ. If you are ruled by a dictator, king, or party, you also know what the rules are; if you follow them, you can avoid trouble.

Credit Image: © Jakub Porzycki / NurPhoto via ZUMA Press)

Credit Image: © Jakub Porzycki / NurPhoto via ZUMA Press)

Our system is much more diffuse and therefore much harder to fight or even understand. Private companies, on a whim, can shut down your social media account, refuse to sell your books, make it impossible for your business to take credit cards, and close your bank account. You have no recourse, not even to the courts. Each company has its own inconsistent, arbitrary, ever-changing rules. Now, they all say, in effect, “We’ll kick you out if we don’t like you.” And that’s what they do.

If there were legal censorship, there would be laws that limited free speech. They might be vague and inconsistently enforced, but there would be rules. If the court system had any integrity, there could be litigation and legal appeals. In our system, every person you know is a potential commissar. If you become the subject of a “viral” story, literally millions of people can turn against you. This is “public shaming” worse than anything the Chinese face.

Their system is authoritarian, but it has this crucial difference from ours: It pushes people to behave correctly. In our Anglo-American tradition, personal virtue is the guarantor of our liberties, so we don’t need overarching government. However, we are no longer virtuous, at least not in the way the Founders understood virtue. Instead, anti-racism has become America’s moral code, and blacks are semi-sacred. Any social interaction with a non-white can be a life-changing disaster if it is caught on camera. The rules for what is politically correct change so quickly no one can be sure what to say to avoid trouble. We’re in an absurd system in which groups that enjoy government mandated “affirmative action” lecture us about our privilege. Although “racism” is the main sin our social credit system punishes there are others: “homophobia,” “Islamophobia,” “misogyny,” “xenophobia,” with more new ones invented all the time.

While the Chinese social credit system builds a better — if regimented — society, ours makes it worse. The media feed non-whites moral arguments to use against whites, whether they are about “racist” police, “systemic racism,” or “far-right extremists.” Anyone non-white, from educated elites to illiterate thugs, can feel justified in attacking middle-class whites because the only explanation for inequality is white racism.

November 2, 2017 – Rongcheng, China: Ju Junfang, vice director of the social credit system, provides voluntary work for the citizens of Rongcheng, who need plus points for their social certificate of good conduct. (Credit Image: © Aurelien Foucault / DPA via ZUMA Press)

November 2, 2017 – Rongcheng, China: Ju Junfang, vice director of the social credit system, provides voluntary work for the citizens of Rongcheng, who need plus points for their social certificate of good conduct. (Credit Image: © Aurelien Foucault / DPA via ZUMA Press)

Thus, our system doesn’t build “mutual trust” but suspicion and even hatred. Instead of building national unity, the American system undermines the foundation of patriotism by telling us our history and heroes were racist and evil. The Chinese system punishes destructive behavior and rewards charity. The American system winks at destructive behavior such as BLM rioting, and rewards “virtue signaling,” not real virtue.

White-owned business can be deplatfromed online and some can be ransacked by radicals, with no interference from the police. The right even to self-defense is under attack (ask Kyle Rittenhouse or Mark and Patricia McCloskey). In some areas, people cannot gather to demonstrate or even to worship, while antifa and BLM protesters can do almost anything with impunity.

Can we honestly say we have more freedom than the Chinese? Can we say that our government pursues our interests or protects our rights? Can we trust technology companies and major media? Are our elites pushing us towards greatness or towards dispossession and pariah status?

Still, we do have advantages. The great strength of the American Social Credit System is that it is ad hoc and unofficial. It’s hard to know exactly what or whom to attack but that’s also its weakness. There are “gaps” in the system we can exploit. At the same time, our rulers’ lust for power is clearer than ever. Donald Trump, however half-hearted and bumbling, forced our opponents to reveal their snarling hatreds and their breathtaking arrogance in believing they have the right to control what we read, hear, watch, and think.

Shanghai, China – Diners eat lunch near a restaurant ‘sincerity display’ that provide video feeds from kitchens, health ratings and other information. Such displays are part of a “social credit” system. (Credit Image: © Dave Tacon / ZUMA Wire)

Shanghai, China – Diners eat lunch near a restaurant ‘sincerity display’ that provide video feeds from kitchens, health ratings and other information. Such displays are part of a “social credit” system. (Credit Image: © Dave Tacon / ZUMA Wire)

We still have rights. American Renaissance sued the state of Tennessee, and won the right to use public facilities without paying for security. Others are suing tech companies. We are creating new ways of donating and accepting money, spreading our message, and building new platforms. These aren’t temporary workarounds, but steps towards community- and even nation-building. They are forcing us to do the things we should have been doing anyway.

What should a healthy society want? Perhaps every advanced society will have a formal or informal Social Credit System. Elites always try to control information, capital, and behavior. When we take control of our own destiny, we will promote strength, beauty, and virtue. We are a freedom-loving people, so I believe that if we slough off this current system, we can achieve these goals without repression.

Who rules the United States? I’d argue it’s media and Big Tech. They decide who can speak in the public square, raise money, do business online, or enjoy the full protection of law. They encourage victimhood instead of heroism, and distrust instead of unity. China’s system promotes positive values, exalts its people, and directs them towards positive ends.

It’s hard not to feel envious. The greatest threat to white Americans certainly isn’t Beijing. It’s those who presume to rule us, holding us captive, trapping us behind a blue screen.

https://www.unz.com/ghood/americas-social-credit-system-is-worse-than-chinas/

First Comes A Rolling Civil War
Biden is on a double precipice of the worst-ever economic depression coupled with imminent explosions of social rage
Pepe Escobar • November 9, 2020 • 1,100 Words

The massive psyops is ongoing. Everyone familiar with the

Transition Integrity Project (TIP) knew how this would imperatively play out. I chose to frame it as a think tank gaming exercise in my Banana Follies column. This is a live exercise. Yet no one knows exactly how it will end.

US intel is very much aware of well-documented instances of election fraud. Among them: NSA software that infiltrates any network, as previously detailed by Edward Snowden, and capable of altering vote counts; the Hammer supercomputer and its Scorecard appthat hacks computers at the transfer points of state election computer systems and outside third party election data vaults; the Dominion software system, known to have serious security issues since 2000, but still used in 30 states, including every swing state; those by now famous vertical jumps to Biden in both Michigan and Wisconsin at 4am on November 4 (AFP unconvincingly tried to debunk Wisconsin and didn’t even try with Michigan); multiple instances of Dead Men Do Vote.

The key actor is the Deep State, which decides what happens next. They have weighed the pros and cons of placing as candidate a senile, stage 2 dementia, neocon warmonger and possible extorsionist (along with son) as “leader of the free world”, campaigning from a basement, incapable of filling a parking lot in his rallies, and seconded by someone with so little support in the Dem primaries that she was the first to drop out.

The optics, especially seen from vast swathes of the imperial-interfered Global South, may be somewhat terrible. Dodgy elections are a prerogative of Bolivia and Belarus. Yet only the Empire is able to legitimize a dodgy election – especially in its own backyard.

Welcome to the New Resistance

The GOP is in a very comfortable position. They hold the Senate and may end up picking up as may as 12 seats in the House. They also know that any attempt by Biden-Harris to legislate via Executive Orders will have…consequences.

The Fox News/ New York Post angle is particularly enticing. Why are they suddenly supporting Biden? Way beyond internal family squabbles worthy of the Succession saga, Rupert Murdoch made it very clear, via the laptop from hell caper, that he has all sorts of kompromat on the Biden family. So they will do whatever he wants. Murdoch does not need Trump anymore.

Nor, in theory, does the GOP. Former CIA insiders assure of serious backroom shenanigans going on between GOP honchos and the Biden-Harris gang. Trade-offs bypassing Trump – which most of the GOP hates with a vengeance. The most important man in Washington will be in fact GOP Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell.

Still, to clear any lingering doubts, a vote recount would be absolutely necessary in all 6 contested states – WI, MI, PA, GA, NV and AZ. Through hand counting. One by one. The DoJ would need to act on it, immediately. Not gonna happen. Recounts cost a ton of money. There’s no evidence Team Trump – on top of it short of funds and manpower – will be able to convince Daddy Bush asset William Barr to go for it.

While relentlessly demonizing Trump for spreading “a torrent of misinformation” and “trying to undermine the legitimacy of the US election”, mainstream media and Big Tech have declared a winner – a classic case of pre-programming the sheep multitudes.

Yet what really matters is the letter of the law. State legislatures decide whose electors go to the Electoral College to appoint the President.

Here it is – Article II, Section 1, Clause 2: Each state shall appoint electors “in such Manner as the Legislature Thereof May Direct.”

So this has nothing to do with governors, not to mention the media. It’s up to GOP state legislatures to act accordingly. The drama may roll out for weeks. The first step of the Electoral College procedure takes place on December 14. The final determination will only happen in early January.

Meanwhile, talk of a New Resistance is spreading like wildfire.

Trumpism, with 71 million + votes, is firmly established as a mass movement. No one in the GOP commands this kind of popular appeal. By sidelining Trumpism, the GOP may be committing seppuku.

So what will Deplorables do?

The always indispensable Alastair Crooke hits the nail on the head in a powerful essay: Trump is the President of Red America. And depending on how the scripted (s)election tragicomedy develops next, the Deplorables are bound to become The Ungovernables.

Crooke references a crucial parallel evoked by historian Mike Vlahos, who shows how the current American saga mirrors Ancient Rome in the last century of the Republic, pitting the Roman elite against the Populares – which today are represented by Red (Trumpist) America:

“This was a new world, in which the great landowners, with their latifundia [the slave-land source of wealth], who had been the ‘Big Men’ leading the various factions in the civil wars, became the senatorial archons that dominated Roman life for the next five centuries — while the People, the Populares, were ground into a passive — not helpless — but generally dependent and non-participating element of Roman governance: This sapped away at the creative life of Rome, and eventually led to its coming apart.”

So as much as the Dem machine had wanted it, Trump is not yet Imperator Caesar Augustus, whom the Greeks called Autokrator (autocrat), but was a de facto monarch. The American Augustus, Tiberius and most of all Caligula is still further on down the road. He will definitely be a benign, humanitarian imperialist.

In the meantime, what will imperial Big Capital do?

The West, and especially the American Rome, is on the edge of a double precipice: the worst economic depression ever, coupled with imminent, myriad, uncontrollable explosions of social rage.

So the Deep State is reasoning that with Biden – or, sooner rather than later, Supreme shakti and Commander-in-Chief Maa Durga Kamala – the path gets smoother towards the Davos Great Reset. After all, to reset the chess pieces, first the chessboard must be knocked over. This will be one step beyond Dark Winter – which not accidentally was evoked by teleprompter-reading Biden himself on the final presidential debate. The script gets ominously closer to the Rockefelller Foundation’s 2010 Lock Step.

Meanwhile, Plan B is kept in ready, steady, go mode: the lineaments of a global rampage, focused on “malign” Russia’s sphere of influence to satisfy a “revived” NATO and the military-industrial complex, which selected the now media-appointed President-Elect in the first place because he’s no more than a pliant cardboard figure.(Republished from Asia Times by permission of author or representative)

https://www.unz.com/pescobar/first-comes-a-rolling-civil-war/

The Democrats Have Stolen the Presidential Election
Paul Craig Roberts • November 12, 2020 • 1,700 Words •

Paul Craig Roberts’ Interview with the European magazine Zur Zeit (In This Time):

https://zurzeit.at/index.php/die-demokraten-haben-die-praesidentenwahl-gestohlen/

English Translation:

A few months ago it looked like the re-election of Trump was almost certain, but now there was a close race between Trump and Biden? What happen during the last months? 

In the months before the election, the Democrats used the “Covid pandemic” to put in place voting by mail. The argument was used that people who safely go to supermarkets and restaurants could catch Covid if they stood in voting lines. Never before used on a large scale, voting by mail is subject to massive vote fraud. 

There are many credible reports of organized vote fraud committed by Democrats. The only question is whether the Republican establishment will support challenging the documented fraud or whether Trump will be pressured to concede in order to protect the reputation of American Democracy.

For those influenced by a partisan media that is denying the massive fraud that occurred, here is an overview of the elements of the fraud and the legal remedies. https://www.unz.com/article/of-color-revolutions-foreign-and-domestic-the-first-72-hours/

It is difficult to know or to ensure that the ballots are actual ballots from registered voters. For example in the early hours of the morning of November 4 large ballot drops occurred in Michigan and Wisconsin that wiped out Trump’s lead. State officials have reported that people not registered—probably illegals—were permitted to vote. Postal service workers have reported being ordered to backdate ballots that suddenly appeared in the middle of the night after the deadline. These techniques were used to erase Trump’s substantial leads in the states of Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Georgia. 

Digital technology has also made it easy to alter vote counts. US Air Force General Thomas McInerney is familiar with this technology. He says it was developed by the National Security Agency in order to interfere in foreign elections, but now is in the hands of the CIA and was used to defeat Trump. Trump is considered to be an enemy of the military/security complex because of his wish to normalize relations with Russia, thus taking away the enemy that justifies the CIA’s budget and power.

People do not understand. They think an election has been held when in fact what has occurred is that massive vote fraud has been used to effect a revolution against red state white America. Leaders of the revolution, such as Democrat Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, are demanding a list of Trump supporters who are “to be held accountable.” Calls are being made for the arrest of Tucker Carlson, the only mainstream journalist who supported President Trump. 

In a recent column I wrote:

“Think what it means that the entirety of the US media, allegedly the ‘watchdogs of democracy,’ are openly involved in participating in the theft of a presidential election.

“Think what it means that a large number of Democrat public and election officials are openly involved in the theft of a presidential election.

“It means that the United States is split irredeemably. The hatred for white people that has been cultivated for many years, portraying white Americans as “systemic racists,” together with the Democrats’ lust for power and money, has destroyed national unity. The consequence will be the replacement of rules with force.”

Mainstream media in Europe claim, that Trump had “divided” the United States. But isn`t it actually the other way around, that his opponents have divided the country?

As the German newspaper editor Udo Ulfkotte revealed in his book, Bought Journalism, the European and US media speak with one voice— the voice of the CIA. The very profitable and powerful US military/security complex needs foreign enemies. Russiagate was a CIA/FBI successful effort to block Trump from reducing tensions with Russia. In 1961 in his last address to the American people President Dwight Eisenhower warned that the growing power of the military/industrial complex was a threat to American democracy. We ignored his warning and now have security agencies more powerful than the President.

The military/security complex favors the disunity that the Democrat Party and media have fostered with their ideology of Identity Politics. Identity politics replaced Marxist class war with race and gender war. White people, and especially white heterosexual males, are the new oppressor class. This ideology causes race and gender disunity and prevents any unified opposition to the security agencies ability to impose its agendas by controlling explanations. Opposition to Trump cemented the alliance between Democrats, media, and the Deep State.

It is possible that the courts will decide who will be sworn into office at January 20, 2021. Do you except a phase of uncertainty or even a constitutional crisis?

There is no doubt that numerous irregularities indicate that the election was stolen and that the ground was well laid in advance. Trump intends to challenge the obvious theft. However, his challenges will be rejected in Democrat ruled states, as they were part of the theft and will not indict themselves. This means Trump and his attorneys will have to have constitutional grounds for taking their cases to the federal Supreme Court. The Republicans have a majority on the Court, but the Court is not always partisan. 

Republicans tend to be more patriotic than Democrats, who denounce America as racist, fascist, sexist, imperialist. This patriotism makes Republicans impotent when it comes to political warfare that could adversely affect America’s reputation. The inclination of Republicans is for Trump to protect America’s reputation by conceding the election. Republicans fear the impact on America’s reputation of having it revealed that America’s other major party plotted to steal a presidental election.

Red state Americans, on the other hand, have no such fear. They understand that they are the targets of the Democrats, having been defined by Democrats as “racist white supremacist Trump deplorables.”

The introduction of a report of the Heritage Foundation states that “the United States has a long and unfortunate history of election fraud”. Are the 2020 presidential elections another inglorious chapter in this long history?

This time the fraud is not local as in the past. It is the result of a well organized national effort to get rid of a president that the Establishment does not accept.

Somehow you get the impression that in the USA – as in many European countries democracy is just a facade – or am I wrong?

You are correct. Trump is the first non-establishment president who became President without being vetted by the Establishment since Ronald Reagan. Trump was able to be elected only because the Establishment thought he had no chance and took no measures to prevent his election. A number of studies have concluded that in the US the people, despite democracy and voting, have zero input into public policy.

Democracy cannot work in America because the money of the elite prevails. American democracy is organized in order to prevent the people from having a voice. A political campaign is expensive. The money for candidates comes from interest groups, such as defense contractors, Wall Street, the pharmaceutical industry, the Israel Lobby. Consequently, the winning candidate is indebted to his funders, and these are the people whom he serves. 

European mainstream media are portraying Biden as a luminous figure. Should Biden become president, what can be expected in terms of foreign and security policy, especially in regard to China, Russia and the Middle East? I mean, the deep state and the military-industrial complex remain surely nearly unchanged.

Biden will be a puppet, one unlikely to be long in office. His obvious mental confusion will be used either to rule through him or to remove him on grounds of mental incompetence. No one wants the nuclear button in the hands of a president who doesn’t know which day of the week it is or where he is.

The military/security complex needs enemies for its power and profit and will be certain to retain the list of desirable foreign enemies—Russia, Iran, China, and any independent-inclined country in Latin America. Being at war is also a way of distracting the people of the war against their liberties.

What the military/security complex might not appreciate is that among its Democrat allies there are some, such as Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who are ideological revolutionaries. Having demonized red state America and got rid of Trump (assuming the electoral fraud is not overturned by the courts), Ocasio-Cortez and her allies intend to revolutionize the Democrat Party and make it a non-establishment force. In her mind white people are the Establishment, which we already see from her demands for a list of Trump supporters to be punished.

I think I’m not wrong in assuming that a Biden-presidency would mean more identity politics, more political correctness etc. for the USA. How do you see this?

Identity politics turns races and genders against one another. As white people—“systemic racists”—are defined as the oppressor class, white people are not protected from hate speech and hate crimes. Anything can be said or done to a white American and it is not considered politically incorrect.

With Trump and his supporters demonized, under Democrat rule the transition of white Americans into second or third class citizens will be completed.

How do you access Trump’s first term in office? Where was he successful and where he failed?

Trump spent his entire term in office fighting off fake accusations—Russiagate, Impeachgate, failure to bomb Russia for paying Taliban to kill American occupiers of Afghanistan, causing Covid by not wearing a mask, and so on and on.

That Trump survived all the false charges shows that he is a real person, a powerful character. Who else could have survived what Trump has been subjected to by the Establishment and their media prostitutes. In the United States the media is known as “presstitutes”—press prostitutes. That is what Udo Ulfkotte says they are in Europe. As a former Wall Street Journal editor, I say with complete confidence that there is no one in the American media today I would have hired. The total absence of integrity in the Western media is sufficient indication that the West is doomed.(Republished from PaulCraigRoberts.org by permission of author or representative)

https://www.unz.com/proberts/the-democrats-have-stolen-the-presidential-election/

Israel’s Power Is Unlimited
Democrats and Republicans bow to force majeure
Philip Giraldi • November 17, 2020 • 1,700 Words

Even though there was virtually no debate on foreign policy during the recent presidential campaign, there has been considerable discussion of what President Joe Biden’s national security team might look like. The general consensus is that the top levels of the government will be largely drawn from officials who previously served in the Obama administration and who are likely to be hawkish. There has also been, inevitably, some discussion of how the new administration, if it is confirmed, will deal with Israel and the Middle East in general.

Israelis would have preferred a victory by Donald Trump as they clearly understand that he was and still is willing to defer to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on nearly all issues. Indeed, that process is ongoing even though Trump might only have about nine more weeks remaining in office. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is reportedly preparing to sanction several international human rights organizations as anti-Semitic due to the fact that they criticize Israel’s brutality on the West Bank and its illegal settlement policies. The White House is also prepared to free convicted but paroled Israeli spy Jonathan Pollardfrom travel restrictions so he can move to Israel, where he is regarded as a hero. Pollard was the most damaging spy in U.S. history and any mitigation of his sentence has been opposed by both the Pentagon, where he worked, and also by the intelligence community.

Finally, it is widely believed that before the end of the year Trump will declare that the United States accepts the legitimacy of Israeli intentions to declare annexationof nearly all the Palestinian West Bank. The White House will actually encourage such an initiative reportedly “to sow hostility between Israel and the Biden administration.” One should note that none of the pro-Israeli measures that are likely to come out of the White House enhance U.S. security in any way and they also do nothing particularly to benefit Trump’s campaign to be re-elected through legal challenges.

If Biden does succeed in becoming president, the special place that Israel occupies in the centers of American power are unlikely to be disturbed, which is why Netanyahu was quick off the mark in congratulating the possible new chief executive. Biden has proudly declared himself to be a “Zionist” and his running mate Kamala Harris has been a featured speaker at the annual gatherings of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in Washington. Both are strongly supportive of the “special relationship” with the Israel and will make no effort to compromise America’s apparent commitment to protect and nourish the Jewish state.

Though Israel is central to how the United States conducts its foreign policy, the country was invisible in the debates and other discussions that took place among candidates during the recent campaign. American voters were therefore given the choice of one government that panders to Israel at the expense of U.S. security or another party that does exactly the same thing. To be sure, Biden did state that he would work to reinstate the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) relating to Iran’s nuclear program, which was canceled by Trump. But he also indicated that it would require some amendment, meaning that the Iranians would have to include their missile program in the monitoring while also abandoning their alleged propensity to “interfere” in the Middle East region. The Iranian government has already indicated that additional conditions are unacceptable, so the deal is dead in the water. Israel has also privately and publicly objected to any new arrangement and has already declared that it would “save the option” of working through the Republican Senate to thwart any attempts by the Biden Administration to change things.

That Israel would blatantly and openly interfere in the deliberations of Congress raises some serious questions which the mainstream media predictably is not addressing. Jewish power in America is for real and it is something that some Jews are not shy about discussing among themselves. Jewish power is unique in terms of how it functions. If you’re an American (or British) politician, you very quickly are made to appreciate that Israel owns you and nearly all of your colleagues. Indeed, the process begins in the U.S. even before your election when the little man from AIPAC shows up with the check list that he wants you to sign off on. If you behave per instructions your career path will be smooth, and you will benefit from your understanding that everything happening in Washington that is remotely connected to the interests of the state of Israel is to be determined by the Jewish state alone, not by the U.S. Congress or White House.

And, here is the tricky part, even while you are energetically kowtowing to Netanyahu, you must strenuously deny that there is Jewish power at work if anyone ever asks you about it. You behave in that fashion because you know that your pleasant life will be destroyed, painfully, if you fail to deny the existence of an Israel Lobby or the Jewish power that supports it.

It is a bold assertion, but there is plenty of evidence to support how that power is exerted and what the consequences are. Senators William Fulbright and Chuck Percy and Congressmen Paul Findlay, Pete McCloskey and Cynthia McKinney have all experienced the wrath of the Lobby and voted out of office. Currently Reverend Raphael Warnock, who is running against Georgia Loeffler for a senate seat in Georgia demonstrates exactly how candidates are convinced to stand on their heads by the Israel Lobby. Warnock was a strong supporter of Palestinian rights and a critic of Israeli brutality. He said as recently as 2018 that the Israelis were shooting civilians and condemned the military occupation and settlement construction on the Palestinian West Bank, which he compared to apartheid South Africa. Now that he is running for the Senate, he is saying that he is opposed to the Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement due to what he calls the movement’s “anti-Semitic overtones.” He also supports continued military assistance for Israel and believes that Iran is in pursuit of a nuclear weapon, both of which are critical issues being promoted by the Zionist lobby.

There is some pushback in Washington to Israeli dominance, but not much. Recent senior Pentagon appointee Colonel Douglas Macgregor famously has pointed outthat many American politicians get “very, very rich” through their support of Israel even though it means the United States being dragged into new wars. Just how Israel gains control of the U.S. political process is illustrated by the devastating insider tale of how the Obama Administration’s feeble attempts to do the right thing in the Middle East were derailed by American Jews in Congress, the media, party donors and from inside the White House itself. The story is of particularly interest as the Biden Administration will no doubt suffer the same fate if it seeks to reject or challenge Israel’s ability to manipulate and virtually control key aspects of U.S. foreign policy.

The account of Barack Obama’s struggle with Israel and the Israeli Lobby comes from a recently published memoirwritten by a former foreign policy adviser Ben Rhodes. It is entitled The World As It Is, and it is extremely candid about how Jewish power was able to limit the foreign policy options of a popular sitting president. Rhodes recounts, for example, how Obama chief of staff Rahm Emanuel once nicknamed him “Hamas” after he dared to speak up for Palestinian human rights, angrily shouting at him “Hamas over here is going to make it impossible for my kid to have his fucking bar mitzvah in Israel.”

Rhodes cites numerous instances where Obama was forced to back down when confronted by Israel and its supporters in the U.S. as well as within the Democratic Party. On several occasions, Netanyahu lecture the U.S. president as if he were an errant schoolboy. And Obama just had to take it. Rhodes sums up the situation as follows: “In Washington, where support for Israel is an imperative for members of Congress, there was a natural deference to the views of the Israeli government on issues related to Iran, and Netanyahu was unfailingly confrontational, casting himself as an Israeli Churchill…. AIPAC and other organizations exist to make sure that the views of the Israeli government are effectively disseminated and opposing views discredited in Washington, and this dynamic was a permanent part of the landscape of the Obama presidency.”

And, returning to the persistent denial of Jewish power even existing when it is running full speed and relentlessly, Rhodes notes the essential dishonesty of the Israel Lobby as it operates in Washington: “Even to acknowledge the fact that AIPAC was spending tens of millions to defeat the Iran deal [JCPOA] was anti-Semitic. To observe that the same people who supported the war in Iraq also opposed the Iran deal was similarly off limits. It was an offensive way for people to avoid accountability for their own positions.”

Many Americans long to live in a country that is at peace with the world and respectful of the sovereignty of foreign nations. Alas, as long as Israeli interests driven by overwhelming Jewish power in the United States continue to corrupt our institutions that just will not be possible. It is time for all Americans, including Jews, to accept that Israel is a foreign country that must make its own decisions and thereby suffer the consequences. The United States does not exist to bail Israel out or to provide cover for its bad behavior. The so-called “special relationship” must end and the U.S. must deal with the Israelis as they would with any other country based on America’s own self-interests. Those interests definitely do not include funding the Israeli war machine, assassinating foreign leaders, or attacking a non-threatening Iran while continuing an illegal occupation of Syria.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org,address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org.

https://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/israels-power-is-unlimited/

Four More Years of…

All our political forms are exhausted and practically nonexistent. Our parliamentary system and electoral system and our political parties are just as futile as dictatorships are intolerable. Nothing is left. And this nothing is increasingly aggressive, totalitarian and omnipresent.
Jacques Ellul, Anarchy and Christianity (1991)

Look at them! Look at them, will you? Behold our politicians’ horrible languid maws!; the courtier-like faces of department managers. They are indeed salesmen, for the very power of nations is measure in relation to their own mercantile activity.
Jean Cau, Le meutre d’un enfant (1965)

“What’s going to happen now?” I was asked earlier today. “Nothing and everything,” I replied. Immigration, largely unchallenged and unscathed (excepting the incidental impact of COVID-19 on population movement) from four years of Trumpism, will now continue to accelerate unabated. Zionism will continue to enjoy the expansion of American institutional and military support, this time with the blood interest of Jared Kushner replaced with the Jewish spouses of all three of Biden’s children. And the momentary Obama-era delusion of a post-racial America will continue to dissolve in the reality of the increasing awareness and importance of race throughout the West, not solely as a result of mass migration but also of the increasing ubiquity of the ideologies of racial grievance and revenge. There will, of course, be a dramatic change for the worse in tone and spirit, and some smaller legislative victories like the banning of federal anti-racism training will likely soon be reversed. The defeat of Donald Trump is also hugely demoralizing to many decent American people, and emboldening to their bitterest enemies. This is to be sorely regretted. But it is in the shared qualities of Trump and Biden, rather than the election and sham ballots, that the real nature of our political systems and their future can be perceived. And it is in these shared qualities that our true problems lie.

Parliamentary electoral democracy is merely a representation of the general system in which it operates. Slavoj Zizek comments:

At the empirical level, of course, multi-party liberal democracy “represents” — mirrors, registers, measures — the quantitative dispersal of different opinions of the people, what they think about the proposed programs of the parties and about their candidates, etc. However, prior to this empirical level and in a much more radical sense, the very form of multi-party liberal democracy “represents” — instantiates — a certain vision of society, politics, and the role of the individuals in it: politics is organized in parties that compete through elections to exert control over the state legislative and executive apparatus, etc. One should always be aware that this frame is never neutral, insofar as it privileges certain values and practices.

The truth of the system, in terms of its non-negotiable aspects, is thus revealed in the “values and practices” privileged and ring-fenced under both Trump and Biden. What are these non-negotiables? Zionism, GloboHomo ideological capitalism and its “woke” leftist correlates, and the neoliberal promotion of GDP as the benchmark of human success and happiness.

Zionism

Jews have little to fear from a Biden presidency, which is presumably why Haaretz is claiming that the “American Jewish vote clinched Biden’s victory and Trump’s ouster. … American Jews decided the outcome of the U.S. elections.” Donald Trump might have been hailed as the “most pro-Israel President in U.S. history,” but Jews are notoriously unreliable in their partnerships with non-Jewish elites. Fate, it must be said, has not been kind to those gentile elites that have exhausted their usefulness to Jews. And Trump is surely exhausted, having spent a busy four years fighting for Jews in Israel and in the United States. He reversed long-standing US policies on several critical security, diplomatic and political issues to Israel’s favour, including the Iran nuclear accord, the treatment of Israel at the UN, and the status of Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. In December 2019, he announced his Executive Order on Combatting Anti-Semitism, promising to fight “the rise of anti-Semitism and anti-Semitic incidents in the United States and around the world.” One wonders what else he could possibly have done for these people—apart from a war with Iran—a question that appears to have been answered by Jews with a resounding “Nothing.” One can only imagine Trump’s facial expression on seeing Benjamin Netanyahu’s emphatic congratulations to Joe Biden, punctuated with the loving refrain: “I have a personal, long and warm connection with Joe Biden for nearly 40 years, and I know him to be a great friend of the State of Israel.”

Biden and Harris, replete with their immediate familial ties to Jews, are viewed in Zionist circles as being at least as reliable as Trump, although not as exuberant and bullish. Biden has been known as a staunch supporter of Israel throughout his 36 years in the Senate, often cites his 1973 encounter with then-Prime Minister Golda Meir as “one of the most consequential meetings” of his life, and has on more than one occasion regaled audiences with a tale about his father telling him that “You don’t need to be a Jew to be a Zionist.” While some modifications are likely in the American approach to Iran, few reversals are expected on Trump’s four years of pro-Israel activism. Biden, for example, has weakly criticized moving the embassy to Jerusalem but said he would not pull it back to Tel Aviv. Michael Herzog at Haaretzdescribes both Biden and Harris as “traditional Democrats, with a fundamental commitment to Israel whose roots are in part emotional in nature (in contrast to Obama).”

The change in relationship between America and Israel will be, in meaningful terms, restricted to the personal. Netanyahu, for all his fawning, is likely to undergo a personal demotion of sorts, with David Halbfinger of the New York Timespointing out that we can expect a Biden presidency to diminish Netanyahu’s “stature on the global stage and undercut his argument to restive Israeli voters that he remains their indispensable leader.” Palestinian leaders, probably the best-positioned to offer a perspective on the potential for an improvement in their condition under the new presidency, have been sombre to say the least. Hanan Ashrawi, a senior PLO official, respondedto the question if she expected United States policy to continue tilting heavily in Israel’s favor: “I don’t think we’re so naïve as to see Biden as our savior.” Contrast this with the cheerfulness and confidence of Israel settlers who have grown accustomed to the perennial nature of American support for Zionism. David Elhayani, head of the Yesha Council, an umbrella for Jewish settlements in the West Bank, said the party of the U.S. president ultimately doesn’t matter so long as the baseline commitment to support Israel persists: “Under Obama, we built more [settlement] houses than we have under Trump … I think Biden is a friend of Israel.”

The fact that the grassroots of the Democratic Party are drifting away from Zionism is no more consequential than the fact the grassroots of the Republican Party wanted major action on immigration reform. The former, like the latter, have been equally ignored by the real power brokers and influencers. Regardless of the radical appearance of Democrat-affiliated movements like Black Lives Matter, the fact remains that all of the leftist aggression and rhetoric of the summer of 2020 has resulted in the putative election of an establishment Zionist and political pragmatist who is sure to execute a more or less formulaic neoliberal scheme for government. In one sense, the bland, forgetful, and familiar Biden, who lacks any hint of genuine or novel ideology and was elected purely as a symbol of “not Trump,” is the fitting response to Trump, who was equally devoid of ideological sincerity or complexity beyond the symbolism of “not Establishment.” And so, while the media proclaims, as Heraclitus, that “all is in flux,” from a different perspective we could argue, like Parmenides, the opposite — “there is no motion at all.”

GloboHomo

If I retain one abiding, surreal, memory of the Trump presidency in the years ahead it will be the Don dancing to the Village People in the wake of his numerous drives to legalize homosexuality in various African backwaters. That the Red State Christians comprising so much of his base could maintain their self-adopted blind spot on this issue is a remarkable testament to the power of personality, because no world leader in history has done more in recent history than Donald Trump to export what E. Michael Jones has so aptly termed “the Gay Disco” — the double-barrelled shotgun of unbridled finance capitalism and the superficial freedom of sexual “liberty.” As the pastors and preachers of South Carolina and Texas urged their huddled congregations to pray for the President, Trump was busy dispatching new missionaries, like U.S. Ambassador to Germany Richard Grenell, to the corners of the earth in search of converts to the Church of GloboHomo.

In February 2019, the U.S. embassy indulged in some nostalgia for Weimar when it flew LGBT activists from across Europe to Berlin for a strategy dinner to plan to push for decriminalization in places that still outlaw homosexuality — mostly concentrated in the Middle East, Africa and the Caribbean. For my part, I can think of many social problems in these parts of the world, but it really takes a special kind of mind to arrive at the opinion that one of the most pressing is that they need to become more gay. Grenell, however, horrified that Iran has the audacity to execute its own convicted homosexual pederasts, was not to be deterred, and was instrumental in the blackmail of lesser nations, promising they would be denied access to terrorism intelligence if they don’t legalise homosexuality. All of which has left the far corners of the American cultural-military empire questioning whether they could better live with suicide bombers or sodomy.

Against such manoeuvres, Biden’s apparent claim to be one half of the “most pro-equality ticket in history” seems a little overstated. That being said, there’s no question that Biden is going to step up the domestic nature of GloboHomo significantly as soon as he assumes office. Biden has pledged to sign the Equality Act, thus far opposed by the Trump administration, within his first 100 days in office, a piece of legislation that will amend “the Civil Rights Act to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, housing, public accommodations, public education, federal funding, credit, and the jury system.” Biden has pledged to appoint significant numbers of homosexuals and transsexuals to positions of influence, and has promised to allow transsexuals to join the military. Experienced in advancing global LGBT+ dogma as part of the Obama-Biden administration, Biden will also once again take up the global mantle, expressing his “hopes to reverse Trump’s efforts and expand queer rights internationally by making equality a centrepiece of US diplomacy,” and condemning Poland’s “LGBT-free zones.” Stunning and brave indeed.

There is a certain sense in the cases of both Trump and Biden that, for all the flamboyance of their efforts in this area, there is a performative aspect to this politics. I don’t get the impression that either has been especially personally committed to these ideas or actions, but that, as pragmatic-symbolic politicians, they have been made aware that this is the direction the broader System is moving in and they should comply and support it. The longevity and gradual acceleration of these trends, beginning in earnest with the presidency of Bill Clinton, would suggest a systemic movement underlying, and entirely untethered to, specific political parties or figures. Throughout the West, and much as with Zionism, GloboHomo, or hedonistic credit-based capitalism and its sexual correlates more generally, is to be accepted and promoted as an essential part of the role of neoliberal government. In the context of declining basic freedoms at home, for example the obvious decline in free speech and the creeping criminalisation of meaningful dissent against the status quo, the international promotion of homosexuality and transsexual identities offers a cost-free and PR-friendly method for increasingly authoritarian neoliberal regimes to posture as crusaders for freedom. The trucker in Ohio is, logical flaws notwithstanding, and whether he wants it or not, thus assured of his place in the Land of the Free via his government’s emancipation of the gays and transvestites of Uganda. Engaged politically only at the most superficial level, the masses play along with this ruse, often in blunt denial, possessing only fragmentary realisations of the fact their countries are changing around them while the petty “rewards” of Americanism are meagre and peculiar, if not insulting.

GDP!

Along with frequent reassurances that he was “giving serious consideration” to doing something, Trump’s presidency was marked by regular updates on the performance of American GDP. Unfortunately the GDP, like the Jewish vote, appears to have stabbed him in the back, with around 70% of American GDP represented in counties that (putatively!) voted Democrat. Trump’s tragicomic belief in GDP performance as a form of politics in its own right is perhaps the quintessential example of the mentality of homo economicus and the tendency of neoliberals to view countries as mere zones, or economic areas, where everything is based on rationalism and materialism, and national success is purely a calculation of economic self-interest. Writing pessimistically of Trump’s expected nomination in 2015, I issued a stark warning about the influence of Jared Kushner, but also added:

For all his bluster, Trump is a creation and product of the bourgeois revolution and its materialistic liberal ideologies. We are teased and tantalized by the fantasy that Trump is a potential “man of the people.” But I cannot escape the impression that he is a utilitarian and primarily economic character, who seeks a social contract based on personal convenience and material interest. In his business and political history I see only the “distilled Jewish spirit.”

I don’t think I’ve seen anything over the last four years that has made me question or revise that assessment. Trump’s dedicated tweeting on GDP in fact had the opposite effect.

The disturbing reality, of course, is that GDP is only one side of a national economy. Another crucial aspect is government borrowing, and current projections suggest that the United States is “condemned to eternal debt.” According to The Budget Office of the United States Congress (CBO), “the US economy would enter the first half of this century with a public debt equivalent to 195 percent of its GDP. … In the next 30 years the debt of the most powerful economy on the planet would more than double.” The first significant jump occurred in the wake of the subprime crisis, in which Jewish mortgage lenders were especially prominent. The subprime crisis forced public debt to 37 percent of GDP, which then rose steadily to 79 percent between 2008 and the outbreak of COVID-19. It now stands at 98 percent, and is accelerating. Although the United States has reached comparable levels of debt in the past, there has almost always been an accompanying war, or wars, which acted as a financial pressure valve — a fact that does not bode well for isolationists but may be encouraging news for Zionist hawks.

Joe Biden has claimed recently that “a Biden-Harris Administration will not be measured just by the stock market or GDP growth, but by the extent to which growth is raising the pay, dignity, and economic security of our working families” — while at the same time welcoming millions of new immigrants and legalizing the ~20M+ illegals into the workforce .The American economy is in fact extremely unlikely to change direction, with Biden reassuring his billionaire donors gathered at the Carlyle Hotel in Manhattan in June 2019 that “no one’s standard of living will change, nothing would fundamentally change.” I believe him. Biden was part of an administration that looked on as 10 million working Americans lost their homes. Matt Stoller at the Washington Posthas described Obama-era Democrat economic policies as “in effect, a wholesale attack on the American home (the main store of middle-class wealth) in favor of concentrated financial power.” Biden was part of a team that outright rejected prosecuting major bankers for fraud and money laundering, and that represented one of the most monopoly-friendly administrations in history:

2015 saw a record wave of mergers and acquisitions, and 2016 was another busy year. In nearly every sector of the economy, from pharmaceuticals to telecom to Internet platforms to airlines, power was concentrated. And this administration, like George W. Bush’s before it, did not prosecute a single significant monopoly under Section 2 of the Sherman Act. Instead [under Obama] the Federal Trade Commission has gone after such villains as music teachers and ice skating instructors for ostensible anti-competitive behavior. This is very much a parallel of the financial crisis, as elites operate without legal constraints while the rest of us toil under an excess of bureaucracy.

Biden is the product of funding from forty-four billionaires, including six hedge fund speculators, seven real estate barons, and five in the tech sector. Of the top 22 donors, at least 18 are Jews (Jim Simons, Len Blavatnik, Stewart Resnick, Eli Broad, Neil Bluhm, David Bonderman, Herb Simon, Daniel Och, Liz Lefkovsky, Steve Mandel, Bruce Karsh, Howard Marks, S. Daniel Abraham, Marc Lasry, Jonathan Tisch, Daniel Lubetsky, Laurie Tisch, and Robert Toll). The Jewish consortium behind Biden is almost identical in its financial composition to that behind Trump which, as I’ve explained previously, was notable for its embodiment of “usury and vulture capitalism, bloated consumerism, and the sordid commercial exploitation of vice.” Biden’s transition team, meanwhile, is comprised of “executives from Lyft, Airbnb, Amazon, Capital One, Booz Allen, Uber, Visa, and JPMorgan.” In short, expectations that Biden is going to break up Big Tech, or any monopoly for that matter, are the fantasies of the deluded, the ignorant, and the duped.

Conclusion

While the drama and recrimination surrounding the election are unquestionably fascinating, I hope you’ll forgive for being less agitated than most. My reasons for lethargy are simple: I knew that regardless of outcome we’d get four more years — four more years of Zionism, GloboHomo, and the standardized, rationalized machinery of economic escalation that now provides the apologetic engine for mass migration. Behind the abortion debates, Supreme Court picks, culture wars, and media theater, these are the non-negotiables of the System. You don’t hear about them, and you can’t talk about them, because you can’t vote on them. And this is the biggest electoral fraud of all.

https://www.unz.com/article/four-more-years-of/

No Surrender! President Trump Should Not Concede—No Matter What

The Dem/ Main Stream Media Complex is infuriated that President Donald J. Trump will not concede the 2020 election. This is a Sign of Contradiction that he is doing the right thing. This does not yet mean that Trump won enough votes in key states, as Tucker Carlson has noted, but we also can’t say with confidence that Trump lost [Tucker Carlson Says There’s Not Enough Fraud to Change Election Resultsby Jacob Jarvis, Newsweek, November 10, 2020]. And here appears to be solid evidence that there was at least some wrongdoing—far more so than for the Russia Hoax that paralyzed Trump’s Administration for three years. The same neoconservatives who are demanding Trump concede would be insisting the U.S, invade another country to “bring democracy” if we saw its government behaving this way. Ultimately, the entire battle is about who is sovereign in this country—American citizens or the Dem/ MSM complex, including Big Tech oligarchs. They ensured it was not a “free and fair” election, and President Trump should never concede.

Let’s consider the almost hysterical fury from the MSM telling us that President Trump has a duty to admit defeat because Biden “won.”

And there are countless others.

In fact, of course President Trump isn’t doing anything illegal. No one has won or lost. Senate Mitch McConnell may be afraid to defy Trump because he doesn’t want to lose the two Senate seats in Georgia and thus, his status as Majority Leader. But he’s absolutely right when he says that the Electoral College determines the winner and, until that happens, “anyone who is running for office can exhaust concerns” [Mitch McConnell says Electoral College will determine 2020 electionby Lisa Mascaro, Fox6 Milwaukee, November 10, 2020]. The Supreme Court case Bush v. Gore that settled the 2000 election didn’t come to an end until December 12, 2000. Media outlets “declaring” the winner have no legal significance, especially when their projections seem to be based on polls that have proven to be inaccurate [Professional pollsters blew it again in 2020. Why? by Matthew Rozsa, Salon, November 4, 2020].

As of this writing, Arizona, Alaska, Pennsylvania, Georgia are all undecided. North Carolina was just called for Trump(and underwhelming Chamber of Commerce GOP senator Thom Tills managed to win a narrow victory over Democratic challenger Cal Cunningham [Cal Cunningham concedes to Thom Tills in North Carolina Senate raceby Evie Fordham, Fox News, November 10, 2020]). Joe Biden’s lead in Arizona is narrow and shrinking dangerously.

President Trump has a strong legal case in the key state of Pennsylvania, where it appears that the state Supreme Court simply created a new power to count votes that arrived after election day. The U.S. Supreme Court (without Amy Coney Barrett) deadlocked over this, but the Trump campaign will almost certainly take this case to SCOTUS again [Byron York’s Daily Memo: The election lawsuit Trump should winby Byron York, Washington Examiner, November 10, 2020]. As Senator Ted Cruz has said, there has thus far not been a “comprehensive presentation of evidence” [Ted Cruz: Trump Election Fraud Allegations Will Be Resolved In Court, Not By Persuading You Or Meby Tim Hains, RealClearPolitics, November 10, 2020]. Republican leaders in Pennsylvania have already called for a recount “in any counties where state law was broken” [Senate Co-Sponsorship Memoranda, Pennsylvania State Senate, November 6, 2020].

However, there are more fundamental issues at stake. Thanks to the Sem/ MSM complex’s campaign of COVID-19 hysteria, the country engaged in a massive experiment with mail-in voting [Are We Sure About All Those Mail-in Ballotsby Josh Hammer, The American Mind, November 10, 2020]. Different state requirements add to the confusion. There have been specific claims of outright fraud, notably the inclusion of dead people on the voter rolls, reports that local officials gave voters instructions that would invalidate their ballots, and open theft of ballots [On Electoral Fraud in 2020by Pedro Gonzalez, American Greatness, November 9, 2020]. Critically, in several of the states where President Trump is launching legal challenges, the common factor is a company called Dominion Voting Systems. In one proven case, a “glitch” in its system awarded 6,000 votes to Joe Biden rather than President Trump [Republicans expand probe into Dominion Voting Systems after Michigan counting snafuby Zachary Halaschak and Emily Larsen, Washington Examiner, November 8, 2020]. One former Deputy Attorney General for Michigan says counters in Detroit outright provided fraudulent ballots to non-voters [Ex-Michigan Deputy Attorney General Alleges Detroit Counters Assigned Fraudulent Ballots To Non-Votersby Kyle Olson, Breitbart, November 9, 2020].

The truth or falsity of these claims must be shown in court. Of course, anti-Trump groups are trying to prevent any legal challenges by individually targeting the law firm that President Trump is using [Inside the Lincoln Project’s new campaign targeting Trump’s law firmby Greg Sargent, Washington Post, November 10, 2020]. No one seems to have considered that such a strategy ensures that most Trump supporters will—correctly—consider a Biden Administration utterly illegitimate.

Twitter and other social networking oligopolists are currently putting their thumb on the scale by censoring posts or by claiming there are “election integrity” issues with posts they dislike, even posts by President Trump himself [Tucker Carlson: Big Tech Took Part in ‘One of the Worst Forms of Election Tamperingby Mary Chastain, Legal Insurrection, November 10, 2020].

This control of information both before and after the election renders democracy pointless. If Tech oligarchs can control what the voters see and hear, we might as well put them in charge and dispense with Election Day altogether. It would be simpler and less time consuming than going through a farce where both the exchange of information before an election and tabulating of votes on Election Day itself are apparently too much for the world’s sole superpower.

If this is the way the system works, then, as President Trump has been claiming for years, it is “rigged” and illegitimate. If this is how it is going to be, whatever the Regime on the Potomac says in future should be considered as foreign to the Historic American Nation as governments based out of Brussels, Moscow, or Beijing.

Indeed, one can’t help but wonder whether the historic American nation would fare better under outright foreign occupation than a hostile elite which considers itself our rulers and treats us with open contempt, if not hatred.

President Trump and outraged Republicans do have a card to play even if all the legal challenges fail. State legislatures must certify a state’s electors before the College can vote for the next president. If state delegations believe the vote has been corrupted, they can send their own competing slate of electors [Donald Trump’s Stealthy Road to Victoryby Graham Allison, National Interest, November 6, 2020].

President Trump also has powers that he can use to change the political environment, especially by destroying hostile institutions and declassifying documents that the Deep State really doesn’t want to be made public [Reflections on the late electionby Curtis Yarvin, Gray Mirror, November 8, 2020].

If a rigged system is going to take President Trump down, he can take it down with him.

Arguably, if President Trump had the will to do something like that, he would not be in this mess. He did not bring Big Tech to heel. He did not ensure that the bureaucracy was filled with people loyal to him. He kept hiring people who were his enemies and then acted surprised when he was rewarded with treachery. He governed like a conventional Republican while talking like a nationalist, the worst of both worlds [The Tragedy of Trumpby Gregory Hood, American Renaissance, November 16, 2018].

Nonetheless, with his back to the wall, Trump can and should fight. Even now, he has a popular movement behind him—all he needs to do is lead them against the System that they thought they had defeated in 2016.

https://www.unz.com/article/no-surrender-president-trump-should-not-concede-no-matter-what/

The Deep State vs the Deep Country
The Saker • November 9, 2020 • 1,800 Words •

I need to begin with the obvious: in spite of all the deep state, propaganda and “deep empire” (transnational) resources being used to declare that “Biden” (i.e. Harris) has won, as of right now nobody knows who got most votes and where.

I would even suggest that we will never really find out who won, because who won depends on a large number of local laws and regulations and because it will probably never be possible to separate the fake votes from the legal ones.

Finally, neither side will ever gracefully admit to having lost the contest. So now the country will enter a profound crisis.

That is the bad news.

But there is also very good news.

First, it has now become clear to the entire planet that the US “democracy” is anything but: the US is an oligarchic plutocracy, plagued with a myriad of antiquated laws and corrupt to the bone. The special “trick” of this US oligarchic plutocracy is that is masquerades as an ochlocracy: there is pretend mob rule which serves as the microscopically small fig leaf hiding the real nature of the regime.

Second, while the Dems did their best to hide this, and they still are, it is now becoming evident that the sheer magnitude of the fraud made it impossible to conceal it. Now if we think of how the AngloZionist Empire has handled equally non-believable nonsense (9/11, Syrian gas attacks, Skripal, Navalnii, etc.) we know what they are going to do next: double down, which will reassure the brainwashed zombies, but will even further infuriate those still capable of critical thought.

Third, the behavior of the US media in this entire operation is so obviously disgraceful that nobody will ever take them seriously again (at least amongst the thinking people, the zombies glued to the Idiot Tube are beyond any rational arguments anyway). This is particularly important in regards to FoxNews who has shown that it was a pseudo-conservative propaganda outlet which, in reality, is completely committed to the political agenda of Rupert Murdoch and his family.

At this point in time, it is impossible to predict what will happen next, but the murder of JFK or the 9/11 false flag strongly suggest that the US deep state will win. There seems to only be one way for Trump to stay in power and it will probably look similar to this:

Giuliani, who I was told won over 4,000 lawsuits in his career, is a very tough guy (look at what he did to the mob in NY!) and he must realize that the lawsuits he will file this week will be the most important ones in his career. They will even probably define his legacy. The notion that he would go to the courts with no solid evidence in his files is simply ridiculous. I don’t see any mechanism which can stop Giuliani now, so the ball will now go to the state and federal courts next and, after that, to the Supreme Court. There the situation is hard to predict.

In theory, Trump probably has enough conservative Justices, especially with Ruth Bader Ginsburg gone and Amy Coney Barrett replacing her. That’s only in theory. In reality, things are much more complex. On one hand, the pressure of the deep state on the Justices will be immense, but on the other hand, once you are a SC Justice you cannot be attacked, at least not legally. Amy Coney Barrett will also face immense pressure to “prove” her “independence” (meaning, if she sides with Giuliani’s side she will be called a Trump shill and even much worse than that!). One thing is certain, any Justice siding with Giuliani will face immense pressures followed by a vicious denigration campaign. Who knows how many Justices would have the courage to face this?

However, there is also the possibility that any Justice siding with Giuliani’s conclusions will go down in history as yet another “profile in courage”, so I would not completely discard that possibility either.

During my student years in the US I had the chance to meet, and study with, such US officials as Paul Nitze or Admiral Zumwalt and I was always amazed at how candid former US officials were, but only once they retired. USSC Justices are not retired, of course, but, like retired officials, they are beyond the reach of any legal reprisals, and that might strengthen their willingness to honestly follow their conscience and speak their minds.

Giuliani will certainly fight hard, but looking at the political correlation of forces I can’t see an outcome where Trump would successfully defeat a much stronger opponent. Think about it, the only possible ally for the Trump campaign would be the Supreme Court: the GOP, Congress, the Deep State, the legacy ziomedia, and even members of the Trump Administration (think Bolton or Esper here) all hate him with a passion. And now that Trump appears to be losing, they are not shy about it.

Still, as the proverb says, we need to hope for the best but prepare for the worst.

That is, obviously, a Harris Administration in control of the Executive.

So what can we expect from these folks?

First and foremost, a sustained campaign to completely negate the First and Second Amendments to the Constitution. Considering how truly sacred these two cornerstones of the US Constitution are for millions of US Americans, we can expect a lot of resistance from the “deplorables”, both legal and violent.

Second, the control of both the Executive and all the major IT giants will mean that free speech will be driven even further underground. This new reality will require a lot of thinking in the development of a strategy to protect the voices which the regime in DC will now openly try to silence.

Possibly the dumbest mistake made by Trump was not to create his own TV channel. He had the money, he could have found allies, but he simply lacked the intelligence to see the danger. Instead, this narcissistic fool thought that Twitter was the way to bypass the legacy media. Is there a possibility that if he is thrown out of the White House we might finally understand that what the US now so urgently needs is, at the very least, a free TV channel and at least one free social media option? Maybe, but I am not holding my breath, Trump always had this ability to disappoint…

Third, on the international front, we can expect even more hysterical Russia bashing (the Dems all hate Russia with a passion, especially since they have brainwashed themselves for four years that “Putin” had “attacked” the US elections). But there is really nothing the US can do to Russia, it is way too late for that. So I would expect even more hot air than from the Trump Administration, and probably not much more action, although that is by no means certain, since a braindead nominal President like Biden would not have Trump’s intelligence to understand that a war against Russia, China or Iran would end in a disaster: Dems always start wars to try to convince the public that they are “tough” (Dukakis in his M-1 tank). Now that they not only appears as weak, but also illegitimate and even senile (did you see Biden trying to run to the podium?), they will have to prove their “virility” and send some cruise missiles flying somewhere (that kind of attack is what these cowards always use first).

As I mentioned in the past, the outcome of this election will not have much of an impact on US foreign policy: first, the US elites more or less all agree on continuing a policy of violent imperialism; but even more crucial is the fact that the Empire is as dead as the Titanic was when it hit the iceberg: not all passengers realized what was taking place, but that did not affect the outcome in the least.

Furthermore, as those familiar with Hegelian dialectics know, each action eventually results in a reaction and the notion that 70,000,000+ voters will simply accept what is self-evidently a coup against not only Trump, but also the US Constitution itself, is ridiculous. If anything, these people will now come to realize that while the US is facing no real foreign threats at all (except those it created itself), there is most definitely an internal threat,in the sense of the United States Uniformed Services Oath of Office, and that this reality gives them the right, and even duty, to “resist tyranny”.

You have probably heard Joe Biden declaring that he wants to heal the wounds, restore unity, rule for all US Americans and the like. I don’t think that this is only empty political rhetoric, though that is part of it too. Mostly, I believe that the Dems are terrified because they know for a fact that they stole the election and this is why after four years of the most divisive and irresponsible rhetoric against Trump, “the racist system” and all the rest of the crap, they are now making a 180 (they are experts at that!) and pleading for calm, peace and unity.

That ain’t going to happen.

Finally, a word to those who like to say that there is no difference between the Dems and the GOP, that this is all a fake conflict: friends, you are both right and massively wrong. You are right when you say that the DNC and the RNC are like indistinguishable twins. But what you are missing are two crucial things:

  1. Factions inside one party can actually go after each other much harder than against their common enemies. I think of the SS vs the SA in Nazi Germany or the Trotskysts vs the Stalinists in the Soviet Union and during the Spanish Civil war.
  2. But, even more crucially, this is not a contest between the Democrats and the Republicans, it is a contest between a “rejected outsider” and both the DNC and RNC!

Conclusion: not the RNC vs the DNC but the Deep State vs the Deep Country

A quick look at a map tells the story: this struggle is most one of the deep state vs the deep (real) country. Yeah, I know, Trump is hardly a miner from West Virginia or a farmer in Alabama. But that doesn’t matter one bit. What does matter is that the deplorables from the “overfly country” felt that Trump speaks for them and that he is all that stands between them and the (pseudo-) Liberals of CNN, the Antifa/BLM thugs and the destruction of the United States as we all knew them. And yes, this is a simplistic view, but it is fundamentally correct one nonetheless.

https://www.unz.com/tsaker/the-deep-state-vs-the-deep-country/

‘Compliance Ambassadors’ Now A Thing – Top 10 Tyrannical Mandates By Liberal Governors Across America- Welcome to Orwell’s ‘1984’ Where Freedom Is An Illusion And Constitutional Rights No Longer Exist

By Susan Duclos – All News PipeLine

While we have seen readers discuss the individual rules and threats of punishments for not abiding by the tyrannical Governor mandates for their particular state, a look at some of the most egregious, over-the-top Orwellian orders, along with the news that there are now “Compliance Ambassadors,” routinely visiting businesses in Nevada, and we are seemingly living in George Orwell’s novel “1984.”

Apparently, Democrats and RINO’s (Republican In Name Only), thought “1984” was an instructional manual, rather than a work of fiction.

Orwell saw where the world was headed back in 1949 when his book was published. Even earlier since he needed time to write it and get it published.

Between online speech police, threats of censorship for wrong-think, actual censorship for ideologies not approve by liberals, rules and regulations that get more strict and stringent every year, and now Governors using an outbreak of a new coronavirus as a guise to implement even more tyrannical and draconian rules against their constituents, we are truly living in Orwell’s world of “1984.”

COMPLETE TYRANNY FROM STATE LEADERS

State Governors are now determining what businesses are “non-essential” and force them to close for long periods of time, costing livelihoods on a regular basis, forcing employees and owners to become jobless. 

People are being forced to wear masks, even if outside in their own yards, as well as any time out in public, or face penalties and fines.

While out in public, people are being told where to stand, where to sit, what they are allowed to do, what businesses they are allowed to frequent (by closing the ones they consider non-essential), when they are allowed to worship and where they are allowed to do their worshipping (by disallowing church attendance), all amongst some of the most egregious violations of Americans’ rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.

There is also talk of forcing Americans to take a vaccine, one that hasn’t even been available to the public yet,

Compliance AmbassadorsOn November 13, 2020, the city of Las Vegas’ official Twitter account shared a tweet that said “Our business license officers & compliance ambassadors continue to visit 300 businesses per day every day, to ensure they are following @GovSisolak’s recent directive to help keep workers and visitors safe.”

(ANP EMERGENCY FUNDRAISERDue to unexpected medical and emergency repair billsplease consider donating to ANP to help keep us in this ‘Info-war’ for America at this most critical time in US history,  during a time of systematic ‘big tech’ censorship and widespread Democrat corruption.)

Then they linked to the Nevada government website, detailing the work of “compliance ambassadors” which is part of their “ambassador program,” working in conjunction with business license officer, who handle the “enforcement” for violations found by the “compliance ambassadors.”

As part of their October 2nd update, we see the following:

Compliance ambassadors are not enforcing the directive; they are observing behaviors and verifying whether violations are occurring. If there is an enforcement action that needs to be taken, that will be done by a business license officer. The compliance ambassadors are existing city employees; they are not new hires or newly added positions. These employees have been reassigned to the ambassadors program temporarily from their normal department. These ambassadors have been trained to identify whether any violations of the directive are occurring and to educate the business owners. If these ambassadors observe a clear violation of the directive, they will refer that to a business license officer who will then visit the business and address the violation. Business license officers have the ability to write citations and issue fines.

Compliance ambassadors…. I read that term and thought there is no way this is America. Then I thought, should Biden take office, which is looking likely, how long before we have compliance officers country-wide, not only for businesses, but in our homes.

Before anyone scoffs at that idea, remember, Indoor and outdoor gatherings in private homes in New York state will be limited to 10 people, Gov. Andrew Cuomo announced Wednesday.

How do you imagine Cuomo plans to implement and enforce this order, if not sending law enforcement to actual private residences to count the amount of people who are in attendance?

Some law enforcement have already stated publicly, that is not a mandate they will enforce for the tyrannical governor Cuomo.

Other liberal governors are attempting to cancel Thanksgiving, and/or Christmas.

California is mandating no more than “three households” are allowed to get together at one residence for get togethers. Not be outdone in the tyranny department, the Nazi from Michigan, Gretchen Whitmer aka “wHitler” has decreased that to two households.

Oh, let us not forget they are ordering people to wear masks even in their own homes, as well as telling those hosting the Thanksgiving holiday gathering that they must document everyone that attended.

Tell me if you think this is still America?

TOP 10 TYRANNICAL MANDATES

USA Today has a state-by-state list of “restrictions” forced onto residents, with links to the actual announcements or posts detailing them.

We are picking what we see as the top ten tyrannical mandates, but readers are welcome, encouraged, to share which ones they think are the most egregious in the comment section below.

1.) Michigan: 

In-person classes at high schools and colleges statewide will be suspended for three weeks along with eat-in dining at restaurants and bars under sweeping new restrictions aimed at reining in the exponential growth of coronavirus cases in Michigan, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer announced Sunday.

The new public health order is to take effect Wednesday, and includes the cancellation of organized sports and group exercise classes, though gyms may remain open for individual exercise with strict safety measures, and professional and college athletics may continue.

Casinos and movie theaters, indoor ice rinks, bowling alleys and bingo halls also will have to temporarily shut down, and all businesses are asked to allow employees to work from home if possible.

Gatherings inside homes are limited to two households at any time and health officials strongly urge families to pick a single other household to interact with over the next three weeks. 

2.) California: 

Gov. Gavin Newsom announced Nov. 16 that another 28 counties have moved into the most restrictive tier that’s part of the four-tier reopening plan. The governor cited rising infections for having to pull the “emergency brake.” That brings to 41 the number of counties out of 58 in the state in that tier, which requires there be no indoor restaurant dining or indoor church services. California has had a statewide mask order since June.

As previously stated, California has also recently ordered no more than three households can attend a Thanksgiving dinner with family and friends.

3.) New York:

Bars and restaurants with a liquor license will have to close by 10 p.m. and indoor gatherings at private homes will be limited to no more than 10 people under new statewide rules announced Nov. 11 by Gov. Andrew Cuomo. Gyms will also have to close by 10 p.m.

The restrictions, which take effect Friday night, come in response to increasing COVID-19 numbers in the state and growing concerns that it will be hit with a second wave of coronavirus cases, hospitalizations and deaths.

The limit on social activities at home, down from the current 50, is sure to draw some backlash, but Cuomo, a Democrat, said on Twitter, “We know indoor gatherings and parties are a major source of COVID spread.”

New York has had a statewide mask order since April.


Indoor and outdoor gatherings in private residences in New York state will be limited to 10 people.

4.) New  Jersey:

Gov. Phil Murphy lowered the threshold for the number of people allowed at indoor gatherings.

He said Nov. 16 that indoor gatherings will now be limited to 10 people, down from 25, and the outdoor capacity will be lowered to 150, from 500. 

Towns and counties will have the discretion to close bars, restaurants and other businesses by 8 p.m. under an executive order that Murphy, a Democrat, said he planned to sign Nov. 12.

The order will allow local officials to close any business not considered essential two hours earlier than a statewide order issued this week that stops bars and restaurants from operating indoors after 10 p.m. 

[…]

New Jersey has had a statewide mask order since July.

5.) Nevada: 

Nevada takes the fifth spot, not so much for their overall restrictions but any state that uses “compliance ambassadors,” should be shamed publicly.

“Nevadans need to change behaviors immediately. …Again, if we don’t make progress over the next 14 days, I will be forced to take stronger action.”

Sisolak urged Nevadans to shelter in place as much as possible, describing it as “stay-at-home 2.0.” But he stopped well short of telling tourists to stay home, adding that he was simply demanding that visitors play by the rules. 

6.) Oregon:

Gov. Kate Brown announced Nov. 13 a two-week “freeze” for the state that will take effect starting Nov. 18. Restaurants and bars will have to go back to take-out service only — previously they were allowed to have limited indoor seating — and indoor recreation centers like gyms, museums and theaters will close again, as will zoos and gardens. Grocery stores will be limited to 75% capacity, and Brown is encouraging curbside pickup when possible. 

Additionally, the freeze will stop visits to nursing homes and business are now required to mandate that employees work from home as much as possible. Social gatherings, in or out, are not to include more than six people from two households.

Oregon has had a statewide mask order since July.

7.) Massachusetts: 

Republican Gov. Charlie Baker instituted a partial stay-at-home order effective Nov. 6. The revised order seeks to restrict late-night congregating, telling residents to stay home from 10 p.m. to 5 a.m. ET. But it allows trips to work, running “critical errands,” such as going for groceries or for health reasons, and allows people to take walks.

Restaurants, liquor stores, gyms, hair salons, theaters and some other recreational businesses and attractions must close from 9:30 p.m. to 5 a.m. as well. Restaurants, however, may be allowed to stay later for takeout food. Private gatherings at people’s homes, limited to 10 people inside and 25 outdoors, must end by 9:30 p.m.

[…]

All residents also must wear face masks even when they can maintain 6 feet of distance from others under the order. The state has had a mask mandate since May.

8.) Minnesota: 

Democratic Gov. Tim Walz imposed new COVID-19 restrictions Nov. 10 amid a surge in statewide infections, reducing the allowed capacity at bars and restaurants and setting limits on social gatherings. Conditions will get dramatically worse unless people start changing their behavior, he said.

Bars and restaurants must stop serving at 10 p.m., but they can still offer takeout and delivery, and attendance at weddings, funerals and social gatherings will be limited.

Minnesota has had a statewide mask order since July.

9.) Illinois:

“For the next three weeks, stay home as much as possible, leaving only for necessary and essential activities, such as work that must be performed outside the home, COVID-19 testing, visiting the pharmacy, and buying groceries,” the department said in a news release Nov. 11. “Our goal is to reduce transmission as we head into the holidays so businesses and schools can remain open.”

Illinois has had a statewide mask order since April.

10.) Hawaii: 

Democratic Gov. David Ige signed an emergency order on Nov. 16 to clarify the state’s mask mandate by creating identical requirements across all islands.

While Hawaii has had a statewide mask order in place since April, the rules varied by county, leading to confusion, Hawaii News Now reported. 

“All persons in the State shall wear a face covering over their nose and mouth when in public,” the Nov. 16 proclamation said

Hawaii started allowing all travelers to use proof of a negative COVID-19 test Oct. 15 in lieu of having to quarantine. 

Related: Guide to State Quarantine Rules for Travelers

BOTTOM LINE

Things are rapidly racing in the wrong direction, where freedoms are being limited, Constitutional rights are being violated by leaders who swore to uphold and defend the very Constitution they are crapping all over, and the media is once again showing they are the enemy of the people by not calling out these tyrannical and Orwellian mandates.

https://allnewspipeline.com/Compliance_Ambassadors_Now_A_Thing.php

Science As God: Tech Hearing And COVID Show Us Exactly Where Censorship Is Headed

NOVEMBER 18, 2020 By Christopher Bedford

In all the back and forth of Tuesday’s Big Tech hearing, Democratic Sen. Chris Coons’ exchange with Twitter’s Jack Dorsey stood out most starkly, offering a window into the next step of the left’s long-championed Big Tech censorship of scientific dissent from liberal orthodoxy.

“You do, Mr. Dorsey, have policies against deep fakes or manipulated media, against Covid-19 misinformation, against things that violate civic integrity,” the Delaware senator began, “but you don’t have a standalone climate change misinformation policy. Why not?”

Our policies are living documents,” Dorsey replied. “They will evolve, we will add to them, but we thought it important we focus our energies and prioritize the work as much as we could.” And then:

Well, Mr. Dorsey… I cannot think of a greater harm than climate change, which is transforming literally our planet and causing harm to our entire world. I think we’re experiencing significant harm as we speak. I recognize the pandemic and misinformation about Covid-19 manipulated media also cause harm but I’d urge you to reconsider that because helping to disseminate climate denialism in my view further facilitates and accelerates one of the greatest existential threats to our world.

This has been ongoing for years in corporate media. In 2019, Chuck Todd pompously announced his show would no longer “give time to climate deniers.” Two years before that, when The New York Times’ Bret Stephens used his debut column to call out “The Climate of Complete Certainty” that seeks to shut down completely reasonable dissent, the paper faced vicious backlash labeling Stephens a “climate denier.” For more than a decade before this, more of the same — often trickling up, from activists to the reporters who sympathize to the powers that can truly silence voices.

Four years ago, reporters demanded then-President Barack censor fake news, pushing Press Secretary Josh Earnest into the awkward position of having to remind apparent journalists of the First Amendment four times. The targets that day were the Bat Boy-likefarces they blamed for Her 2016 loss, but it was already obvious the definition of “fake news” would rapidly expand. Once President Donald Trump assumed office, corporate media and allied politicians bypassed the White House and turned to Silicon Valley, which fell in line quickly enough.

COVID-19 provided the first preview of the new alliance, where even doctors and scientists were censored for carefully — we once said “scientifically” — questioning the alarmists’ narrative of the day. At the same time, Democrats, corporate media, and even corrupt, foreign bodies like the World Health Organization have been permitted to push whatever information supports that day’s goal post.

Completely rational appeals are met with absurdities like “the science is decided,” as if constantly evolving experimentation in search of knowledge can be bottled into some oracle-like decree to support the mob’s latest demand. Rather than decided science, these decrees are mere hypotheses susceptible to support and opposition, but through the alliance of Democrats, corporate media, and Silicon Valley, they become unquestionable edicts ranging from No Business to EternalMask-Wearing to No Family For Thanksgiving.

Coons’s comments are a good reminder that what is COVID today is climate tomorrow. Indeed, COVID policy has offered Americans a perfect preview of what will happen if climate alarmists get their way: Science not as method, but as god. And not the strong and mysterious God of the Jewish and Christian faiths, but a shifting one, whose every dictum and desire is whispered to the kings and enforced at their whims.

Do you have a problem with that? You can take it up with The Science. And The Science is decided.Christopher Bedford is a senior editor at The Federalist, the vice chairman of Young Americans for Freedom, a board member at the National Journalism Center, and the author of The Art of the Donald. Follow him on Twitter.

https://thefederalist.com/2020/11/18/science-as-god-tech-hearing-and-covid-show-us-exactly-where-censorship-is-headed/

Americans Voted To End War In Syria, But This Unelected Bureaucrat Lied To Overrule Them

One factor in a bunch of Americans opting for Donald Trump in 2016 was his promise not to start a new war in the Middle East — but the D.C. establishment secretly kept troops in Syria, and lied about it to the president.By Willis L. Krumholz

Defense One, a subsidiary of The Atlantic, came out with a story last week about a man named Jim Jeffrey. If you haven’t heard of him, don’t feel bad, but he’s pretty important in Washington, D.C. Under his fancy title, he’s been appointed to oversee the U.S. fight against ISIS and what are supposed to be the limited operations of the American troops who still remain in Syria.

Jeffrey is now also a hero in D.C., because in the interview with Defense One he bragged about how he misled President Donald Trump and other top White House officials about the real number of U.S. troops in Syria. “We were always playing shell games to not make clear to our leadership how many troops we had there,” Jeffrey told the Defense One reporter.

The Establishment Wants War in Syria

To say that the D.C. foreign policy establishment wants a U.S. ground presence in Syria is an understatement. During the Obama administration, partisan former Central Intelligence Agency Director John Brennan spent $1 billion from taxpayers per year trying to arm “moderate” rebels in Syria.

What Brennan got was loads of American weapons in the hands of jihadists, including ISIS affiliates. In one example, a particular program trained 15,000 rebels in Jordan and returned them to Syria. Only “four or five” recruits out of the 15,000 turned up to fight. The rest either joined jihadist forces, including ISIS, or sold their American weapons to these forces.

The futility of regime change efforts didn’t deter official Washington, however. Western media raved about “the white helmets.” They also glossed over the fact that there were few moderate rebels and that many of America’s preferred rebels to take on the dictatorship of Bashar al-Assad were guilty of unspeakable brutalities.

Meanwhile, a civil war pitting Muslim Sunnis against Shias — which was partly fueled by American money and weapons and certainly fueled by weapons and money from Gulf Sunni states, including Saudi Arabia — caused a humanitarian crisis. Millions of refugees flooded Europe. Into this chaos and power vacuum stepped ISIS, which at its pinnacle had amassed a huge amount of territory in Iraq and Syria.

On the campaign trail in 2016, Trump repeatedly promised to destroy ISIS and then get U.S. troops out of Syria. This was a large difference between Trump and his Republican primary opponents and then later Hillary Clinton, who argued that U.S. involvement in Syria should not be limited to destroying the Islamic State and that the United States should topple Assad.

Trump’s view was that if Assad was toppled, the power vacuum would be greater, and the jihadist problem would worsen. He also argued that such a move was not in America’s interest, had no clear exit strategy, and would cause an even greater humanitarian disaster, including thousands of dead American troops.

As president, Trump routinely calledSyria a place of “sand and death.” Multiple times he attempted to pull the United States out of Syria, only to be met with Assad allegedly striking civilians and official Washington clamoring for a response. Finally, in December 2018, Trump gave a withdrawal order. This led to the resignation (or firing) of Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, along with Brett McGurk, the former special envoy for Syria. Trump repeated that order in October 2019.

Jeffrey called Trump’s decision to fulfill his campaign promise and remove U.S. troops from Syria “the most controversial thing in my fifty years in government.” Each time Trump gave the withdrawal order, according to Jeffrey, Trump was“convinced to leave a residual force in Syria and the fight continued.” In reality, officials kept troops behind far above the “residual force,” unbeknownst to the president.

“What Syria withdrawal? There was never a Syria withdrawal,” Jeffrey bragged. “When the situation in northeast Syria had been fairly stable after we defeated ISIS, [Trump] was inclined to pull out. In each case, we then decided to come up with five better arguments for why we needed to stay. And we succeeded both times. That’s the story.”

Officially, America has 200 to 400 troops on the ground in northeast Syria, ostensibly to guard the oil fields in that area held by U.S. Kurdish allies. Anonymous officials say the number is more like 900 today, however, and Jeffrey told Defense One that the number of troops in Syria is “a lot more than” the roughly 200 troops that Trump agreed to leave behind there in October 2019.

Defense One concluded its story by noting that Jeffrey didn’t support Trump but agrees with Trump’s “realpolitik” Middle East foreign policy and efforts to make North Atlantic Treaty Organization members pay more for defense. Jeffrey also said he views Joe Biden favorably. In fact, after signing a letter in 2016 that said Trump was unfit for the presidency, it appears as if Jeffrey still opposes Trump: “I know what I did in 2016, I do not disagree with that,” Jeffrey said.

While Defense One quoted colleagues who said Jeffrey is a “consummate apolitical public servant,” many others were upset by Jeffrey’s admissions. Republican Rep. Jim Banks of Indiana, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, is furious and called for Jeffrey to be “punished.”

Who Has the Power in America?

People in Middle America should be enraged by Jeffrey’s interview. Washington, D.C., should be terrified that the American people might realize people like Jeffrey are only the tip of the iceberg. Jeffrey might be completely right about his view of the world and probably thinks he was doing the right thing, but that doesn’t matter. It doesn’t make Jeffrey’s behavior any less abhorrent.

People didn’t elect Jeffrey to anything. They elected Trump in 2016, and one factor in a bunch of working-class Americans opting for Trump was his promise not to start a new war in the Middle East. A large majority of Americans don’t want U.S. ground troops in Syria. Even a large chunk of Democrats who abhor Trump technically agree with his Syria policy. Labeling Jeffrey a “public servant” is a sick joke. Jeffrey is serving himself, or at least serving his ideology — and he does have an ideology.

Yes, it was Trump’s fault he hired people like John Bolton, a neoconservative ideologue who thought it was his job to stop Trump from following through with his campaign promises. Yet Trump isn’t ideological, and he often filled positions based on the recommendations of those around him, many of whom were card-carrying members of the Republican establishment.

Either way, Trump took a lot of heat for his order to pull troops out of Syria. Mattis resigned, and Democrats, media outlets, and Republicans such as Liz Cheney attacked Trump. Detractors hurled constant accusations that Trump wanting to get U.S. troops out of Syria was yet further proof he was a stooge of Russian President Vladimir Putin. Trump’s differences on foreign policy compared to the D.C. establishment, including over Syria policy, was even a significant factor in the FBI’s decision to legitimize baseless conspiracy theories that Trump was an agent of Russia.

Let’s step back for a second. Millions of working-class Americans, who also voted for Barack Obama, voted for Trump in 2016 because they wanted a change to policy. Now assume Trump is gone, and, truthfully, not much has changed on a fundamental level for many of these working-class citizens. What will happen when a large chunk of the American people realize their votes don’t affect policy?

Trump was considered norm-breaking and obnoxious to these D.C. insiders. Have these insiders not considered that the same people who sent Trump to the White House to shake things up might eventually opt for someone even more norm-breaking than Trump?Willis L. Krumholz holds a JD and MBA degree from the University of St. Thomas. The views expressed are those of the author only. You can follow Willis on Twitter @WillKrumholz.

https://thefederalist.com/2020/11/18/americans-voted-to-end-war-in-syria-but-this-unelected-bureaucrat-lied-to-overrule-them/