Article by Rick Noyes in mrcNewsBusters

 

The Stealing of the Presidency, 2020

The left-wing news media didn’t just poison the information environment with their incessantly negative coverage of President Trump going into the 2020 election. They also refused to give airtime to important arguments of the Republican campaign — both pro-Trump and anti-Biden — which meant millions of voters cast their ballots knowing only what the media permitted them to know about the candidates.

To measure the true effect of the media’s censorship on the election, the Media Research Center asked The Polling Company to survey 1,750 Biden voters in seven swing states (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin), six of which (all but North Carolina) were called for Biden (survey details below). We tested these voters’ knowledge of eight news stories — all important topics that our ongoing analysis had shown the liberal news media had failed to cover properly. We found that a huge majority (82%) of Biden voters were unaware of at least one of these key items, with five percent saying they were unaware of all eight of the issues we tested.

This lack of information proved crucial: One of every six Biden voters we surveyed (17%) said they would have abandoned the Democratic candidate had they known the facts about one or more of these news stories. A shift of this magnitude would have changed the outcome in all six of the swing states won by Joe Biden, and Donald Trump would have comfortably won a second term as president.

Here’s what we found:

 ■ Burying Biden’s Bad News: The media’s censorship of Biden’s scandals had the strongest impact on this year’s election. According to our survey, more than one-third of Biden voters (35.4%) were unaware of the serious allegations brought against the Democratic nominee by Tara Reade, a former staffer who said Biden sexually assaulted her in the 1990s.

If they had known about Tara Reade’s sexual assault allegations, 8.9% told us they would have changed their vote — either switching to Trump or a 3rd party candidate, not voting for any presidential candidate, or not voting at all. By itself, this would have flipped all six of the swing states won by Biden (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin), giving the President a win with 311 electoral college votes.

Even more Biden voters (45.1%) said they were unaware of the financial scandal enveloping Biden and his son, Hunter (a story infamously censored by Twitter and Facebook, as well as ignored by the liberal media). According to our poll, full awareness of the Hunter Biden scandal would have led 9.4% of Biden voters to abandon the Democratic candidate, flipping all six of the swing states he won to Trump, giving the President 311 electoral votes.

 The ticket’s left-wing ideology was another issue barely mentioned by the national press. A GovTrack analysis found Biden’s running mate, California Senator Kamala Harris, had the most left-wing record of any Senator in 2019 (even more than self-described socialist Bernie Sanders). Our poll found that 25.3% of Biden voters said they didn’t know about Senator Harris’s left-wing ideology. If voters had the complete story, it would have led 4.1% of Biden voters to change their vote, flipping Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin to Trump. The result would have been a Trump victory, with 295 electoral college votes.

■ Hiding Trump’s Successes: The liberal media also prevented many Biden voters from learning about record-breaking positive economic news in the months leading up to the election. The five pre-election jobs reports from June 5 to October 2 showed a record 11,161,000 jobs were created in the extraordinary snapback from the pandemic recession. Yet a large number of Biden voters (39.4%) said they didn’t know about this achievement. If they had, 5.4% said they would have changed their vote; this would have swung Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin to Trump, who would have won with 295 electoral votes.

 On October 29, the government reported a huge jump in economic growth — 33.1% on an annual basis, double the previous record. Yet nearly half of Biden voters (49.0%) said they had no idea about this record-breaking achievement. Armed with that information, 5.6% said they would have changed their vote, swinging Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin and a total of 295 electoral votes to Trump.

We saw the same effect when it came to foreign policy. The President and his team made history by brokering peace agreements with Israel and several of her Arab neighbors — one reason Trump received three nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize. Yet 43.5% of Biden voters had no idea about these historic agreements. The information would have led five percent of overall Biden voters to change their vote, putting Trump in front in Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, for a total of 295 electoral votes.

Energy independence was another Trump success. The President took action to start long-stalled pipeline projects and expand drilling offshore and in the Arctic, and it paid off with America becoming a net exporter of oil for the first time in September 2019. More than half (50.5%) of Biden voters said they did not know about this important accomplishment, either. If the information was known by all, 5.8% of Biden’s voters say they would have changed how they voted. This would have changed the outcome in Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, putting Trump in front with 295 electoral college votes.

One important issue that did get a lot of coverage in 2020: the coronavirus pandemic. But what made the news every night was criticism of the President and his administration. Lost in the blistering barrage of bad news were successes such as Operation Warp Speed, which even before the election was well on track to deliver 300,000,000 doses of a safe vaccine as soon as next year.

Our poll found 36.1% of Biden voters said they did not know about the administration’s key role in promoting vaccine research through Operation Warp Speed. If they had, 5.3% told us they would have abandoned Biden, flipping Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, giving the President 295 electoral votes.

■ Putting It All Together: Looking at all eight of these issues together, our poll found that a total of 17% of Biden’s voters told us they would have changed their vote if they had been aware of one or more of these important stories. This would have moved every one of the swing states into Trump’s column, some by a huge margin. The President would have trounced Biden in the electoral college, 311 to 227.

 

In Pennsylvania, 15% of Biden voters said they would have defected. Using the reported vote totals as of noon on November 19, this would have reduced his total by 518,204 votes, flipping the state to Trump. In Michigan, the percentage who would have left Biden was 14%, deducting 392,966 from his tally and flipping that state, too.

In Georgia, 15% of Biden’s voters say they would have defected based on full information, taking 370,838 votes out of his column, and putting Trump comfortably ahead. In Arizona, 21% say they would have changed their vote, deducting 351,150 from Biden’s column and putting Trump in front there, too.

In Wisconsin, Biden would have lost 13% of his voters, taking away 211,987 from his column. In Nevada, the percentage of those who would have left Biden was 18%, or 126,627 voters. Such a shift would have put both of those states in Trump’s column, too.

[In the final state we polled, North Carolina, 21% of Biden’s voters say they would have changed their minds, deducting 563,703 votes from his total and significantly bolstering Trump’s margin of victory in that state.]

It’s important to note that not all of these voters would have switched to President Trump, of course (although about 6% of Biden’s voters say that’s exactly what they would have done). Just by choosing to abandon Biden, these voters would have handed all six of these states, and a second term, to the President — if the news media had properly informed them about the two candidates.

The most basic principle of our electoral system is that our leaders are chosen by the people themselves. But if the people are given systematically one-sided information, with crucial facts omitted, then the real power to choose has been stolen from them.

This unique study of the media and voters suggests that’s exactly what happened in 2020.

 For this report, The Polling Company conducted a national survey of 1,750 individuals living in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin who reported voting for Joe Biden in the 2020 election.

The survey was conducted entirely online, between November 9-18, 2020. The poll has an accuracy of +/- 2.34% at a 95% confidence interval.

https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/rich-noyes/2020/11/24/special-report-stealing-presidency-2020 

 

 

Don't Forget to Recommend
and Follow us at our

W3P Homepage

Is the Future of the GOP a More Polished Populism?

by Sarah Lee writing at RedState

At his CPAC speech in Orlando Sunday, former President Donald Trump hinted he might run again, putting to rest speculation he was out of the game and giving those who simply cannot quit him fodder for the next four years. But on a second issue that many were curious about, he did more than hint: he straight up announced he had no interest in starting a third party to espouse the tenets of “Trumpism.”

“We are not starting a new party…we have the Republican Party [and] it is going to unite and be stronger than ever before,” Trump said. “I am not starting a new party; that was fake news. Wouldn’t that be brilliant? Let’s start a new party and divide our vote so you can never win? We are not interested in that.”

This is an important point because many have been wondering — within the establishment GOP as well as those who found a kindred spirit in the conservatism of Donald Trump — if there was room for the Trump faithful in the traditional GOP. After all, Trump tends to speak directly to, and professes to work on behalf of, the voters themselves. Establishment types call this populism, and not often in a complimentary way. Trump’s base, on the other hand, believes it’s simply the way politicians should behave.

An interesting article from The Conversation postulates there may, in fact, be room for Trumpism in the established GOP, just a less in-your-face version of it. They call it “polished populism” and it’s, theoretically, a blending of the two.

The contemporary conservatism associated with Ronald Reagan in the 1980s and George W. Bush in the 2000s has several facets and factions, but it can be summed up in the phrase, “You keep what you earn, it’s a dangerous world, and God is good.”

The economic, national defense and social conservatives of previous decades tended to agree that human nature is untrustworthy and society is fragile, so the U.S. needs to defend against external enemies and internal decline.

Populist conservatism accepts those views but adds something different: the interests and perceptions of “ordinary” people against “elites.” So populism rejects the notion of a natural aristocracy of wealth and education, replacing it with the idea that people it considers elites, including career politicians, bureaucrats, journalists and academics, have been promoting their own interests at the expense of regular folk.

That’s not a bad summation, really, and it acknowledges what’s happened to the Republican Party as it morphs into the party of the working class, something Democrats have always considered their purview. There are plenty of current GOP leaders — Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz, for example — who have embraced this new direction. Others have most decidedly rejected it. Wyoming Republican Rep. Liz Cheney comes to mind (she also happened to be one of a number of GOP politicians Trump named onstage at CPAC as members of the sitting GOP that should be repudiated).

The Conversation piece acknowledges the divide between the two conservative approaches and frames the differences in terms of personality and rhetoric, specifically pointing out that Trump’s way of speaking breaks with tradition and embraces an effective but coarser use of language, “more like a guy in a bar.”

But when it comes to the policy preferences, well, they’re nearly indistinguishable.

Polished populists take a different approach, arguing for the same policies that Trump did – limiting immigration, redistributing wealth toward the working class rather than just the poor, opposing the woke policies of social justice movements, promoting “America First” foreign and trade policies – but without his overtly antagonistic language.

Some Republicans are now arguing for a rejection of populism and a return to traditional conservatism. Those long-standing GOP priorities include limited government, strong national defense of American interests abroad, religious values and, perhaps most importantly, ordinary political personalities.

Here’s how Trump defined “Trumpism” from CPAC’s main stage Sunday:

“Many people have asked: what is Trumpism?,” he said. “What it means is great deals… not deals [that] give away our jobs. It means low taxes and eliminating job killing regulations. Trumpism means strong borders; people coming into our country based on a system of merit… it means no riots, industry; it means law enforcement. It means very strong protection for the 2nd Amendment, and the right to keep and bear arms. It means support for the forgotten men and women who were taken advantage of for so many years… it means a strong military, taking care of our vets. The mission of our movement and the Republican Party must be to create a future of good jobs, strong families, safe communities, [and] a vibrant and great nation for all Americans… our party is based on love for America and the belief that this is an exceptional nation, blessed by God.”

The Conversation makes a great point that the future of the Republican Party is one with a more populist message that’s delivered in a traditionally politically appropriate style. But if Trump’s CPAC speech is any indication, he’s moving in the direction of a more polished populism himself. Which means that the establishment GOP is going to have to figure out another way to set themselves apart from Trump if they want to win GOP voters back to their style of communicating and, by extension, governing.

 

Article by J.B. Shurk in the American Thinker

 

President Trump's 2021 State of the Union Address

It was just so surreal watching a humbled Donald Trump take the stage at CPAC, visibly shaken by his election loss, bend the knee to Romney-Cheney Republicanism, and express his hope that the attack dogs in the press would leave him alone during his twilight years away from the public eye.

Er...nope.  That doesn't even sound believable.  The only place where that establishment fantasy played out was the online fan fiction board of the Hillary Clinton–John Kasich–Ben Sasse mutual support and suffering group.  Most presidents leave office looking worse for wear; six weeks after being deplatformed by the swamp, Donald Trump looks more like a wrestler getting ready to rumble.

If Washington thought it could weaken President Trump's appeal by making him an "enemy of the state" and trashing his supporters as seditionists, it miscalculated.  If anything, the D.C. mafia cemented his status as the quintessential outsider against whom all future outsiders will be compared, and it has only made the president's in-your-face, take-no-prisoners style of political pugilism more cutting.  

In his first public speech since being "Myanmared," Trump used his opportunity at CPAC to batter Biden's incompetence, rally conservatives to his banner, and dispose of those members in his party who still prefer electing Democrats.  As he read through the list of Republicans who helped instigate a second fake impeachment with a personal promise to destroy them one by one, that unique Trump swagger was in overdrive.  He sounded like a mix of Johnny Cash's "man goin' 'round takin' names," putting together a list nobody should ever want on, and Mark Wahlberg's menacingly polite choir boy telling whiny RINOs unwelcome at CPAC to "say 'hi' to your mother for me" as he smiled for the cameras.  If swiping his election through mail-in balloting and painting him as the leader of a terrorist group was meant to make him disappear, then there's no doubt that removing him from office was a government-run operation.  Only the government could screw up this badly.  At CPAC, the Boss was back, and he didn't look to be going anywhere.

While President Trump wove in and out of scripted points he wanted to hammer home (Ol' Touchy-Smelly's administration is endangering Americans by encouraging endless illegal immigration, failing to get kids back into school, appeasing China and Iran, and senselessly destroying American energy independence.) and delighted his base with the impromptu comedic flourishes that make him compelling, his ninety-minute speech at CPAC was also a conspicuous reminder that Joe Biden is nowhere to be seen, hidden away from the public, kept on ice.  How is it that the former president has managed to deliver a detailed State of the Union Address — spoiler alert: the Union's gone a little gamy since President Popsicle arrived — before the new sitting president?  Does anyone enjoying the perks and privileges of power in D.C. find this strange?  Because to normal folks, Trump sure looks like a president not yet finished, while Biden looks so finished that he's not sure he's president.  

Free advice, Deep State: If you're going to take down a sitting president who has more energy than Tom Cruise dancing on Oprah Winfrey's sofa, then at least install a body in the Oval Office more lively than a medical cadaver.  Otherwise, people start wondering how the naptime president could possibly have scored more votes than anyone else in American history, while his predecessor is still doing two hours of cardio live and onstage in Orlando before sold-out crowds. 

That's something else Washington's bloated bureaucracy never understood about Donald Trump's appeal to his voters: he actually enjoys having fun with ordinary people.  He can tell a joke, and he can take a joke, and most of D.C.'s ruling class can't do either.  While Washington has become a militarized zone complete with barbed wire fencing and shock troops to scare the masses, there's former president Trump laughing it up in Orlando with his friends and giving generous shout-outs to everyone in attendance.  (Jim Jordan, where are you?  Great wrestler, that guy!)  Pelosi's capital is a prison; DeSantis's and Trump's Florida is a party.  Those are optics that even overpriced political operatives from the swamp can understand.  

What they cannot understand is how Donald Trump is still standing and politically viable after everything D.C. has done to crush him.  Framing him as a Russian asset didn't work.  Using the criminal justice system as a form of political persecution against his supporters had no effect.  Not one, but two farce impeachments turned into nothing more than badges of honor.  And tarring the sitting president as an insurrectionist intent on toppling Congress seems to have only made him more popular.  (Go figure!)  The more D.C. demonizes Trump, the more it turns him into just the kind of folk hero who is going to rattle establishment cages for generations.  

CPAC made that clear.  Donald Trump, the man, still looms over everything just as before, but more importantly, Donald Trump's issues loom over everything, too.  Establishment Republicans might not care about border security, but Republican voters most certainly do.  Establishment Republicans might still prefer Wall Street bankers in wingtips, but there's no doubt that the Republican Party's future belongs to working-class voters in Red Wings.  And while too many Establishment Republicans would still rather send American troops abroad than bring American manufacturing back home, it is certain that Trump's new Republican Party has become a home for Main Street patriots with Main Street concerns.  

How is it that D.C. can't succeed in destroying Donald Trump's influence?  Partially, it's because the president actually listened to the concerns of ordinary Americans and made their problems his problems.  Before government officials became nothing more than paid beneficiaries of lobbyists and foreign interests, this was considered normal politicking.  Because the ruling class has abandoned and betrayed ordinary Americans for so many decades, though, Donald Trump made it look revolutionary.  And now the next wave of Republicans, including Ron DeSantis and Kristi Noem, is following in his footsteps.  Listening to the people — what a concept!

Establishment Republicans refused to understand why ordinary voters overwhelmingly chose "outsider" candidates such as Trump.  They refused to understand President Trump's popularity as anything other than a "cult of personality" that would wither away with his presidency.  If the president put one thing to bed at CPAC, though, it was this: Old Guard Republicans can either become part of the change that is transforming the Republican Party or get steamrolled on their way to irrelevancy.  Either way, it's Trump's party from here on out.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/03/president_trumps_2021_state_of_the_union_address.html

Don't Forget to Recommend
and Follow us at our

W3P Homepage

Minneapolis Will Spend $6.4 Million to Try and Get More Police After Defund Police Movement

Allow liberalism and leftist policies to be carried out to their logical conclusion and this is what happens. After Minneapolis, Minnesota decided to adopt a ‘Defund The Police’ posture, violent & property crime skyrocketed. Now the same city council that voted to disband the police, are voting to spend more money hiring 200 police officers….

(UK Daily Mail) Minneapolis is planning to spend $6.4million to hire dozens of police officers, at a time when some City Council members and activist groups have been advocating to replace the police department following the death of George Floyd.

The City Council voted unanimously Friday to approve the additional funding that police requested. According to the Minneapolis Police Department, there are only 638 officers available to work, which is roughly 200 fewer than usual.

[…] The city was plagued by soaring violent crime last year – with homicide, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, theft and arson all up on last year’s figures.

By the end of the year, police had recorded 532 gunshot victims, more than double the same period a year ago.

Carjackings spiked to 375 by December, up 331 per cent from the same period last year. And violent crimes topped 5,100, compared with just over 4,000 for the same period in 2019. (read more)

 

Article by Robert Arvay in The American Thinker

 

Will the states save us from a corrupted GOP?

President Trump said, at CPAC, that he does not support the idea of leaving the Republican Party to form another one.  I understand his reasoning, but I am very skeptical that we can work within the party to successfully reform it.  I will leave one caveat: the states may be able to do it.  Here is my reasoning.  

The Republican senators had their Bunker Hill (Breed's Hill) moments.  They had many opportunities to save the nation.  Save for but a few, they ran away every time.  From November 4 until January 6, the GOP senators could have, at any moment, demanded that the allegations of voter fraud be given a full, fair, and public hearing.  They had the muscle, but not the will.  They sniveled.  They abandoned the nation to the most devastating crime in our history — not only to the fraud itself, but to the predictable and devastating consequences of installing a Biden administration.  They all but invited the barbarians in, and now we will suffer the results.  

There remain a few heroic figures, some in the Senate, many in the House, but they are too few at the moment to stop the final destruction of our nation.  They will remain too few unless improbable remedies are achieved.  If they are not, then the 2022 elections will be every bit as vulnerable, indeed more so, to the same exact techniques that stole our votes in the first place.  To hear RINO senators now boast of what they are going to do in 2022 is to hear them say, "Yeah, those thieves are lucky I didn't step in when I could have — but next time, oh yeah, just wait until next time.  I'll show them.  They'll be sorry next time."  

The sad fact is, too many in the GOP are comfortably ensconced in the swamp of national politics.  They will resist any attempt to shake up the system in which they got elected, and in which they are making their personal fortunes.  They have demonstrated for all to see, that they are perfectly willing to see the "forgotten men and women" who elected Trump — twice — forgotten again.  Those RINO politicians expect a return to the heady days when they could promise everything and deliver nothing, and still get voted into office by a desperate public that saw no better alternative.  

We now have better alternatives — two of them.  

One of them is the much-vilified option of creating a Trump faction, and removing the RINOs.  Oh, no, some say — that would give the election to the Democrats.  To this we must respond, you RINOs are the ones who already gave it away, along with our republic.  

The second option is to strengthen those state governments, which did hold hearings, hearings that plainly showed proof that the left stole the election.  

This second option can massively empower the state governments to take back their constitutional powers — indeed, responsibility — and select their own electors honestly and fairly.  Those states can begin by imposing draconian penalties (at least they will be called that) for anyone who defrauds the election system.  Even "a little cheating" must not be tolerated, as President Trump's lawyer Michael T. van der Veen so eloquently stated to a biased CNN reporter.   Anyone contemplating such fraud, even just a little bit, should immediately break out in a cold sweat at the thought of the decades in state prison that await him.

No doubt the Supreme Court will intervene to declare any meaningful prevention of election fraud to be unconstitutional.  It is here where the states, if at least six or seven of them act in concert, can overwhelm the swamp.  Some states are already doing this, for example, by setting up Second Amendment sanctuaries, in which law enforcement will refuse to illegally confiscate legally owned weapons.  A further needed measure is to return the structures of voting to what they were before leftist officials illegally changed the laws — in other words, violated the laws — to ensure the appearance of a Biden win in their states.  Trump mentioned this in his CPAC address.  

The Supreme Court must be put on notice, as it was when Joe Biden stood on their steps and openly threatened one of them to vote his way, or else.  President Andrew Jackson said it best when he defiantly told the court, you have made your ruling; now enforce it.  

Such bold and aggressive measures from our side will be a prelude to the much-needed Constitutional Convention of the States.  There is no reason to fear that.  Indeed, there is less reason than ever to fear it.  The left has already, in effect, rewritten the Constitution to oppose the will of its Founders.  The states can be fully trusted to be responsible to the will of their voters.  Even in the worst case, they could not do worse than the present leftist system.  

Our nation has withstood a Revolutionary War and a Civil War.  We can withstand the clear and present danger that has now sunk its teeth into the lifeblood of our country.  

If we have the will, if we stand our ground on the modern-day Bunker Hill, we will preserve the Republic.

 https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/03/will_the_states_save_us_from_a_corrupted_gop.html#ixzz6nxqEh5lt

 

Don't Forget to Recommend
and Follow us at our

W3P Homepage

 

 

"The voice of the people is the voice of God"

 

Article by Jeffrey Folks in The American Thinker

 

At CPAC, Trump Doubles Down on Populism

In his CPAC speech on Sunday, former president Trump articulated a populist vision for the future of the Republican Party and for America.  At the heart of the president's thinking lies a powerful message of hope for America's working people.  Unlike the Democrats' idea of governance by and for the elite, Donald Trump believes in the ideals set forth in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution — the principles of equality, opportunity, and unalienable rights.

These principles did not vanish with the 2020 election, nor has President Trump.  The conflict between the elitist and populist vision of America is the most crucial social and political issue of our time.  I believe that the 2020 election was stolen because the political elite realized they could not defeat President Trump in a fair fight.  Trump's populist vision is shared by at least 74 million Americans, and likely by far more.  If the fraud can be contained, 2022 and 2024 will be victorious elections for the GOP and for populism in America.

Declaring that his political journey is "far from over" and hinting that he may be the GOP presidential candidate in 2024 (and ruling out a third-party run), President Trump laid out the policy differences between his and President Biden's administrations.  For most watching the speech, Trump's policies on immigration, job creation, constitutionalism, and foreign policy are clearly superior to those of Biden and Democrats in Congress.  A CPAC straw poll revealed that 95% of those voting wished to see Trump's policies and agenda advanced.

Underlying all of Trump's remarks was the stark divide between heartland Americans and the coastal elite.  The president's assurance that conservatives will win in 2022 and 2024 rests on his belief that conservative thinking is "common sense" and that the conservative vision of America is founded on God-given rights.  If that thinking truly is common sense and those rights truly are God-given — and if, as Trump stressed in his speech, Republicans set about to forestall election fraud before the next election — a conservative victory is likely.

Since before its founding as a nation, America attracted a population that sought personal liberty and economic opportunity.  A despotic, class-based system of privilege stood in the way of this population, and the British Crown imposed the same sort of tyranny that liberals seek to implant in America today.  Americans do not want a European-style government with power centralized in the capital and exercised by a permanent elite akin to the graduates of Oxbridge in Britain or the École nationale d'administration in France.  The European political mentality — a mentality that would accept unelected members of a commission in Brussels as rulers — derives from centuries of serfdom that taught acceptance of an inherited class system.  That mentality is alien to America's thinking, but elitists in the Democratic Party are trying to impose it on us.

Biden and the elite that surround him know little about the real America or the wishes of the American people.  Secretary of state Antony Blinken, for example, has practically no business experience outside government or, from what I can determine, any significant contact with ordinary Americans outside the coastal culture.  He has served in the Clinton, Obama, and Biden administrations and with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and with a liberal think-tank when Democrats were out of power.  Blinken attended an elite prep school in New York City, followed by Harvard and Columbia Law School.  His father and uncle were U.S. ambassadors, and Blinken himself began working on Democrat presidential campaigns as early as 1988, when he was just 26.

There is no record of Blinken's ever working in the private sector (that is, producing or building anything), but he has played an important role in WestExec Advisors and Pine Island Capital Partners, for which he was hired, according to its chairman, for his "access, network and expertise."  This sounds to me a lot like influence-peddling, something the Biden family appears to have engaged in as well, so much so that the New York Times — hardly a unfriendly source — questioned Blinken's potential conflicts of interest if appointed as Biden's secretary of state.

As it is, Blinken is not the only person associated with Pine Island Capital Partners close to Biden.  The list includes Lloyd Austin and Michele Fournoy.  In fact, almost all of Biden's Cabinet appointees, from Blinken to Janet Yellen and John Kerry, fit the same mold: graduation from elite schools, long histories of government service, no real business experience, and complete loyalty to the Washington elite.

It is this elite that President Trump is determined to defeat as he continues to work for the good of "every American," as he declared on Sunday.  As he reaffirmed his overriding policy of "America First," Trump was in effect declaring that he will not accept the influence of the political elite, either in this country or from other countries that wish to exploit the American people by way of the Paris Climate Agreement, the Iran nuclear deal, weak trade agreements, flawed immigration deals, and other failures of Democrat administrations.

What all of these failures have in common is their disregard for the ordinary working American, who is forced to pay for giveaways that enrich foreign entities through deals negotiated by liberals who then benefit in some way from them.  In his CPAC speech, President Trump presented a remarkably clear-eyed assessment of the stakes we face and of the difficult road ahead.  It will not be easy to defeat an articulate and united political elite determined to retain its privileges at the expense of a less organized and less unified public.  But the great weakness of the left, as our former president pointed out, is that leftist policies are simply wrong.

In the long run, no reasonable person can defend the idea of surrendering our sovereignty to our enemies.  Once it is clear what Biden intends, most Americans, I believe, will rally around conservatives in 2022 and 2024.  To paraphrase Isoroku Yamamoto, the American electorate is a sleeping giant.  Biden's radicalism may be just what it takes to awaken it. 

 https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/03/at_cpac_trump_doubles_down_on_populism.html#ixzz6nxn7exs9

 

 

Don't Forget to Recommend
and Follow us at our

W3P Homepage

After Pushing COVID Fear and Public School Closures, Berkely CA Teachers Union President Takes...

After Pushing COVID Fear and Public School Closures, 

Berkely CA Teachers Union President Takes 

Daughter to Private School For In-Class Teaching

by Sundance at Conservative Treehouse

Watch what they do, not what they say.  Remember, in order to continue advancing their ideological positions leftists have to pretend not to know things.  Those who are pushing COVID panic and fear are not worried about the Coronavirus.  COVID fear is a purposeful fraud presented by elites to control the lower class.

CALIFORNIA – Parent groups are crying “hypocrisy” after a video surfaced showing the president of the Berkeley teachers union dropping off his two-year-old daughter at an in-person preschool.

Matt Meyer, president of the Berkeley Federation of Teachers, has fought for what he called the “gold standard” for the teachers he represents — saying Berkeley schools should only reopen to in-person learning when educators are vaccinated, among other criteria.

[…] Looking to prove a double-standard by the Berkeley Federation of Teachers union president, they followed Meyer and his 2-year-old daughter to her preschool, camera in hand. The footage they captured has ignited the ire of parents groups fighting teachers unions — and Meyer in particular. (read more)

Remember, this is not hypocrisy in the traditional sense… The two sets of rules and standards are part of the ideological outlook of an elite ruling class of leftists who believe themselves to be above the rules and regulations they are pushing on others.

It is not a sense of boundless hypocrisy that drives them to showcase their disconnect, the disconnect is purposefully part of the ideological advancement of their goal.

“Elitism” in its most raw and brutal display is a system of people who are beyond reproach according to their own outlook.  They must not be questioned; they are in ultimate control of society, outcomes or (fill_in_the_blank) as an extension of their self-proclaimed magnanimity.

Essentially they are projecting their position inside a club and all those not in the club are outsiders who do not get to provide input or judgement on the club rules.

This might sound like a DUH statement from the literal definition of “elitism”; however, it must be accepted this outlook is one of consumption, not determination.  They believe they represent the ‘greater good’ and by extension control moral authority.  Thus, within their mind, they are above reproach.  The visible outcome is they operate outside the systems they push upon others who are not in the club.

Elites do not have to wear masks (Pelosi hair salon); or elites do not have to abide by group and social distance rules (Newsom at restaurant party); or elites do not have to concern themselves for carbon emissions (Kerry private airline travel); or elites do not have to worry about the justice system (Clinton emails, Comey FBI lies); or elites do not have to subject their children to the same COVID rules on eduction, etc.

This is NOT hypocrisy, this is a fundamental part of creating a classist society.

Those within the club, in this example the DC club or the Union leadership, want those outside the club to accept there are two systems of rights and responsibilities.   The club members have all powerful rights and no responsibilities for consequences; the non club members have lesser rights and full responsibility for consequences.  This is the cornerstone of a tiered or classist society outlook.

“Rules for thee and not for me” is more than a catch phrase; it is an actual worldview with a history in political control.  They are not hypocrites, they are living out their creed.

The outlook gained popularity going all the way back to the formation of the Fabian Socialist society.  You might remember George Bernard Shaw saying “at a certain point those [outside the club] will have to justify their existence.”  Shaw was advocating for a genetic cleansing of those undeserving people who take more from society more than they provide in value.

This Fabian Socialist outlook is the most extreme form of “elitism”, the actual extermination of undesirables, but it is essentially along the same continuum as believing their are two sets of rules depending on your place in the hierarchy of society.

This outlook has been modernized to include the latest industry of Big Tech.  Those who control technocracy have merged with those who control the politics of society.  The outcome is also displayed by elites deciding which voices are allowed to participate in the national conversation, and which voices must be ostracized because they are not compliant to the elitist worldview.

It is critical, actually beyond critical, that people start to accept what they are witnessing is not some misplaced system created by bad actors.  Those bad actors are actually leftist elites who benefit from numbing society to the sheer audacity of their ideology.

Again, we return to this image….

Those who understand big picture dynamics are still comfortable sticking their heads in the sand about “motive”. Most people are still clinging to actual beliefs around a principle of ‘rule of law’ that applies to National Leadership.

We’d better change that thinking quickly – or we’ll be asking ‘what happened’ far too late.

It’s more along the lines of “We see what’s happening, but it’s scary and complicated and confusing, and if we admit that we see it, we will become responsible in a way that we are not if we keep pretending we can’t see it or hear it or maybe we don’t understand it.”

Why don’t we dare say what is so? Are we a bit afraid that if we give up the willful blindness we will perhaps start screaming and not be able to stop?

Do we think we have so little courage? Do we really believe that we have no resources to bring to the battle? Or nothing more to contribute to the turning of the battle?

There are patriots who some might say resemble one of those slightly mad orchestra conductors who keep yelling, “More trumpet! More TRUMPET!” Many of you are such slightly mad orchestra leaders. Don’t be alarmed by some of the strange looks you are getting these days.

“We Need More Trumpets !”

Why the Release of the Khashoggi Report Has Everything to Do With Iran

Lee Smith reporting for The Epoch Times

Last week the Office of the Director of National Intelligence released an assessment claiming that “Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman approved an operation in Istanbul, Turkey to capture or kill Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi.” The Joe Biden White House says that it won’t penalize the de facto leader of a traditional U.S. ally for fear of damaging relations. But that’s misleading, because the purpose of publishing the assessment is to make the Saudis look as bad as possible in order to make Team Biden’s preferred Middle East partner, Iran, look better by comparison.

The administration is preparing to re-enter Barack Obama’s 2015 deal with Tehran and legalize the nuclear weapons program of a terror state that has been launching missile attacks on Saudi Arabia for several years. It’s hard to imagine Washington imposing a steeper penalty on Riyadh.

The intelligence assessment that the Saudi Crown Prince, Mohammed Bin Salman, often referred to as MBS, was responsible for killing Khashoggi was first leaked nearly two and a half years ago by anonymous U.S. officials. The purpose of the leak was to damage relations between Riyadh and Donald Trump.

Obama had downgraded the alliance with the Saudis and other U.S. Middle East partners because he wanted to realign American interests with the anti-American regime in Iran. Even before Trump exited the Iran nuclear deal in May 2018, he signaled that he was jettisoning his predecessor’s destructive policy and restoring the region’s U.S.-led alliance system. Trump made his first presidential trip to Saudi Arabia to underscore the importance of a relationship that brought Saudi investment and American jobs.

After Khashoggi was killed in October 2018, Obama allies used the press to pressure Trump and make Saudi Arabia radioactive. In Νοvember 2018, the Washington Post published anonymously sourced details from what would become the ODNI assessment. According to the Post’s sources, the CIA believed “there is no way this happened without [MBS] being aware or involved.”

If MBS knew that a team was going to Istanbul for Khashoggi, there is no evidence that the Saudi delegation was sent to kill him, never mind on MBS’s orders. And that is why the ODNI report hedges on its central claim: “Although Saudi officials had pre-planned an unspecified operation against Khashoggi,” the assessment reads, “we do not know how far in advance Saudi officials decided to harm him.”

The result is the same in any case—a man’s life was taken by other men. But exactly who that man was has been intentionally obscured in press coverage and Biden administration statements.

First, Khashoggi was not, as the press asserts, a Washington Post columnist. The several opinion pieces the paper published under his name were written by others. Because he did not write English well, his articles were directed, from conception through composition, by paid agents of Qatar, Saudi Arabia’s Gulf Cooperation Council rival, who encouraged him to opine critically on his native country.

Nor was he, as Secretary of State Anthony Blinken tweeted, a permanent U.S. resident, and thereby entitled to the protection, attention, and consideration Washington owes U.S. citizens and green-card holders. Khashoggi owned an apartment in Virginia and lived in the United States on a work visa.

Moreover, Khashoggi was not a “dissident.” He was a Saudi insider with ties to the country’s intelligence services. He had managed media companies owned by a member of the Saudi royal family who was a longtime head of Riyadh’s general intelligence directorate. Khashoggi had once considered Osama Bin Laden a friend and was sympathetic to other Islamic extremist movements. He frequently expressed anti-Israel and antisemitic sentiments on social media. Before he was killed, Khashoggi sought $2 million from Riyadh to start a think-tank in Washington, DC to promote Saudi interests. In other words, it seems he was using his Post articles and relationship with Doha to negotiate with Riyadh for his loyalty.

His death in turn was used by former U.S. officials to advance their causes. A group of retired CIA officers was hammering away at MBS even before he replaced Mohamed Bin Nayef as crown prince in 2017. As a former head of Saudi intelligence, Nayef was well known to U.S. intelligence officials who expected him to ascend to the throne once the aging King Salman died. They assumed Nayef would feather their retirement nests, as the Saudis frequently bestow favors on former U.S. diplomats and senior spies friendly to the Kingdom.

When the King moved his son to the head of the line, those ex-CIA officials saw it as open season on a U.S. ally. The CIA’s anti-MBS initiative intersected with the Obama camp’s efforts to block Trump’s policy to restore the traditional U.S.-led alliance system in the Middle East. Khashoggi’s death was used as the premier platform for the anti-MBS information operation, which was pushed through the press, with the Washington Post as the primary vehicle.

By releasing the DNI assessment, the Biden administration is simply announcing that the Obama policy is once again operative. Virtually all of the Obama officials who swung the Iran deal in 2015 are back with Team Biden, primed to undo sanctions and flood the regime’s war chest.

The assessment is also meant to paint the Saudis as uniquely evil, a tactic similar to the one deployed the last several years against Trump supporters. The establishment smears working-class Americans as racists and now as domestic terrorists to justify destroying them, by sending their jobs to China, opening the doors to millions of illegal immigrants, and so on. And it’s because of Khashoggi, Biden officials and its press surrogates are saying, that the Saudis deserve to live under the threat of a terror state brandishing a nuclear weapon. Of course, legitimizing Iran’s bomb is a problem not only for U.S. Middle East allies but also U.S. national security, even here at home. But what does that matter to an American ruling class that has repeatedly proven it despises America?