Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe appears with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the issues with Hunter Biden’s laptop and the severity of political compromise within the U.S. intelligence apparatus. Ratcliffe notes how politicized the intelligence community and national security have become specifically in defense of lies being perpetrated by those behind the Biden administration.
Misinformation and disinformation is rampant as the Nat Sec community and Intel Community use their political ideology to advance false assertions. Good segment, WATCH:
Corporate MSM, the mouthpieces for Wall Street and the deep state, including Fox News, will do everything possible to stop this type of conversation.
Congresswoman Nicole Malliotakis (R-N.Y.) recently blasted Joe Biden for turning over the southern border to cartels.
During a visit to the Rio Grande Valley border Friday, the Republican
lawmaker said cartels are making an estimated half-a-billion dollars a
month from human trafficking as well as smuggling guns and drugs.
According to Customs and Border Patrol, Mexican cartels are taking advantage of Biden’s lenient border policies.
Malliotakis said, “this is an organized criminal operation that Biden
has allowed to occur by undoing the actions that President Trump took
to create order at the border.” She went on to note, law abiding
citizens and those trying to enter the country legally are the ones who
are suffering the most.
Malliotakis highlighted the process her mother went through to come to
the United States from Cuba while pointing there was order at the time.
She said, “Americans need to know their borders won’t descend into
further chaos.”
Boy howdy is there a disconnect amid the outlook of most ‘conservatives’ when it comes to corporations and capitalism. This tweet is a great place to recognize the distinction between the objectives of multinational corporations and their hatred of capitalism.
First, they were not “corporations” on the call, that is not an accurate description. The assembly was a group of “multinationals” discussing their objectives, goals and outlooks on politics. There is a difference between an ordinary corporation and a multinational corporation. Multinationals hate capitalism.
When I say multinational corporations hate capitalism people look confused.
Let me help by sharing a short video that explains why:
The first myth busted in that video explains why corporations do not like capitalism. That’s why Big Tech is also against capitalism.
Multinationals want control; some call that corporatism…. but the names are moot. Multinationals want control, and capitalism does not allow them control; that is why multinationals do not want capitalism. Multinationals use lobbyists to generate regulations that stall competition.
Multinationals don't want competition; they are, by nature, anti-capitalists.
Frightening, almost surrealistic, headline, isn’t it? And it’s not even close to clickbait. As is usually the case when I read or listen to conservative author and commentator Victor Davis Hanson, his bottom-line analysis and admonitions are straight-up; no punches pulled, no hyperbole necessary
Such was the case with VDH’s recent piece at American Greatness, Radical New Rules for Post-America, in which he says many Americans who privately fear the “radical rules” of the left are now “appearing to accept them publicly.” He begins with a startling line:
“There are 10 new ideas that are changing America, maybe permanently.”
Americans privately fear these rules, while publicly appearing to accept them. They still could be transitory and invite a reaction. Or they are already near-permanent and institutionalized.
“The answer determines whether a constitutional republic continues as once envisioned, or warps into something never imagined by those who created it.”
That an intellectual conservative like Victor Davis Hanson comes right out and says that our constitutional republic — America as we know it — is at a crossroad where one direction leads to protecting it while the other direction leads to America “warping into something never imagined by those who created it” is sobering — and I believe he’s right.
I’ve selected several of the “radical rules” VDH wrote about, the first of which is stuck in our faces by the left on a daily basis — “bigly.”
Hypocrisy is passé. Virtue-signaling is alive.
Climate change activists fly on private jets. Social justice warriors live in gated communities. Multibillionaire elitists pose as victims of sexism, racism, and homophobia.
“The elite need these exemptions to help the helpless. It is what you say to lesser others about how to live, not how you yourself live, that matters.”
We are told — and I choose to be careful, here — wouldn’t want to anger the omniscient social media gods, you know — we are told that this is “existential” and that is “factual,” and more, and we best not question it — all which proves VDH’s reference to instilled fear.
Laws are not necessarily binding anymore.
Joe Biden took an oath to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” But he has willfully rendered federal immigration laws null and void.
Some rioters are prosecuted for violating federal laws, others not so much. Arrests, prosecutions, and trials are all fluid.
“Ideology governs when a law is still considered a law.”
When illegal immigration is, um, illegal — and swarms of illegal-alien-wannabes show up at the southern border decked out in “Biden 2020” campaign T-shirts, to which has been added “Please Let Us In!,” all but demanding that Biden keep his campaign promises — to them? And why would they do that? Oh, I don’t know —maybe because Biden spent most of his incoherent campaign telling them, “Come on over when I’m president!”? Just a hunch.
Racialism is now acceptable.
We are defined first by our particular ethnic or religious tribe, only secondarily—if at all—by an American commonality.
Unapologetic and explicit exclusion of whites from dorms, graduations, safe spaces, welfare, and federal aid programs is now noncontroversial.
It is unspoken payback for perceived past sins, or a type of “good” racism. Falsely being called a racist makes one more guilty than falsely calling someone else a racist.
AMEN. Challenge BLM, systemic racism, white supremacy, or the radical “Critical Race Theory?” You, my white friend, are, therefore “guilty as charged.” On “all counts.”
Now — prove your innocence.
Ignorance is preferable to knowledge.
Neither statue-toppling, name-changing, nor the “1619 Project” require any evidence or historical knowledge. Heroes of the past were simple constructs.
“Undergraduate, graduate, and professional degrees reflect credentials, not knowledge. The brand, not what created it, is all that matters.”
Exactly. Throughout history, radical movements have most feared knowledge — the spread of truth that contradicts their narrative. We are seeing that now. As I suggested above, the list of “things you must not question” continues to expand. And the truth? There is little we can do about it. It is, as the worn-out old saying goes, what it is.
And finally my — I won’t say “favorite”; let’s call it: nailed it.
Wokeness is the new religion, growing faster and larger than Christianity itself.
Its priesthood outnumbers the clergy, and exercises far more power. Silicon Valley is the new Vatican, and Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google, and Twitter the new Gospels.
To VDH’s point, tens of millions of Americans view that “new priesthood” not unlike the typical stories we’ve all heard from friends who grew up in Catholic schools — I did not and I am neither attacking priests nor Catholicism — about the “strict nuns with the rulers” — as in “The Blues Brothers.” Am I wrong?
Saul Alinsky, anyone? Get used to it.
And for “god’s” (lowercase “g” intentional) sake, keep your mouth shut.
You can read the rest of Victor Davis Hanson’s list here.
We all know that we are living in revolutionary times. The origins, ascendence, values, laws, and future of the United States are all under assault by self-described, though accurately described, revolutionaries.
It is a Jacobin, Bolshevik, or Maoist moment. All aspects of life, well beyond politics, are now to be ideologically conditioned. Everything from kindergarten messaging, cartoons, workplace reeducation, and television commercials to college admissions, baseball games, and the airlines are to be “fundamentally transformed” along racial lines.
Long gone is Martin Luther King, Jr.’s dream of a colorblind society. Gone, at least at the state level, is confidence in the melting pot of assimilation, integration, and intermarriage (although mixed marriages and multiracial children are at an all-time high).
Gone are even the affirmative-action doctrines of proportional representation and disparate impact. (Yet the two mandates were always arbitrarily applied, in the sense that the U.S. Postal Service and the professional football and basketball leagues never paid much attention to racial quotas based on demographic percentages, which apparently only applied to white and Asian “overrepresentation” elsewhere).
Wokeism, however, is essentially tribal. It seeks to identify particular nonwhite constituencies, unite them not by identical class, not by similar skin color, not by collective similar history, not by shared experience, not by mutual cultural affinities, not by longstanding historical alliances, but simply by two premises:
1) Those of the woke collective are either claimants to being “nonwhite,” and thus victims of racism, or they are architects and supporters of the wokeist agenda, and: 2) they can thereby all either directly leverage reparatory concessions in hiring, admissions, careers, compensation, and general influence or ensure the revolutionary guillotine exempts themselves.
A cynic might add that much of this new racialism is a product of globalteering, and seeks to cater to huge foreign markets—China especially—by both “looking more like the world,” and delighting America’s critics, while appeasing far less moral audiences and consumers abroad than a perceived shrinking market at home.
Still for the woke revolution to succeed, a number of experiments will have to go its way.
Merit Was Always a Sham?
Wokeism assumes that merit was mostly an arbitrary white construct. Its use was to insist on ethnocentric and culturally exclusionary criteria to ostracize the Other. Otherwise, “merit” had not much relation with real competency.
Is that allegation true? We shall soon see.
But note first that few are saying to keep bar-exam grading static, or SAT minimum scores for admission the same, and thereby instead create a Marshall Plan effort in the inner-city to stop the violence, turn failed schools into stellar academies, and honestly critique single-parent households, illegitimacy, and inordinate criminality—as an effort to ensure African American youth are not just qualified, but better qualified meritocratically than those who are deemed to hold these monopolies.
Instead, take the United Airlines idea that it won’t necessarily train the most qualified would-be pilot candidates. Now it will target applicants by racial groupings and, by fiat, limit white males to 2,500 of 5,000 slots in its pilot-training schools. If a nonwhite applicant has less prior experience with flight, scores lower on a test, or compiled a less than competitive high school or college record, it won’t matter then. These were all always useless benchmarks apparently.
In today’s age of computer-driven avionics, the prerequisite ability to do math, to know something about navigation, to understand computers, or to have the proper temperament to fly a plane doesn’t really matter. The fact that thousands will enter pilot training, and soon aircraft controlling, in part on the basis of their gender or race, will not in any way affect the safety or efficacy of travel.
We will know fairly soon the answers to this woke experiment by two criteria: Will pilot error, whether fatal or incidental, increase? And will our elites, whether in Air Force One, or in their own Gulfstreams, follow suit and hire pilots on the basis of their diversity first, and avionics record second.
We can ditto race-based criteria now used at the corporate and financial level, in high-tech, the military, entertainment, education, and in likely everything from movie roles to book contracts to national awards.
Again, such emphases assume that our current managers, professionals, and directors of the last 50 years were heretofore racists or were hired by racists. Or at least they satisfied artificially constructed high standards that bore little relation to actual skills required on the job.
Or they must no longer enjoy percentages in the workplace simply representative of their demographic percentages, but rather in reparatory fashion become underrepresented rather than just demographically correct.
To sum up, in other words, if there were similar race-based/diversity criteria applied to the current meritocratic NBA, would it matter all that much?
If African American athletes were by protocol and statute kept to between, say, 12-20 percent of the NBA player roster, to reflect the black 12-13 percent of the U.S. population, would it make that much difference?
Would the starting L.A. Lakers five, with one African American forward, one white player, a Latino guard, an Asian center, and a Punjabi shooter be all that less exciting, skilled, or successful a team? Are the current standards that accept or reject an NBA player constructed or weighed to favor African Americans that can be judged by their “overrepresentation”?
In the logic of wokeness, would the resulting appeal of a team—that “looks more like” a multiracial America—make up in diversity, unity, cohesion, equity, inclusion, and appeal what it lost in sheer abilities to make plays, dribble, shoot, rebound, dunk, or block? Were the all-white racialist and exclusionary teams of the 1940s really no different in skill and ability than the purely meritocratic 2021 teams? Of course not.
Again, we are going to find out, and in a number of professions, what happens when traditional meritocratic standards are replaced by woke guidelines.
Some Racism Is Not Racism
Wokeism assumes asymmetry. That is, it assumes, for recompensatory purposes, that the spirit of slavery remains, that the hatreds propelling Jim Crow from 1879 to 2021 are very much alive, that the civil rights movement of “equality of opportunity” of the last 55 years was more or less a noble dud. And the result is wokeism’s doctrine that reparatory bias is not bias. Or if it is, the people will understand, Animal Farm-style, why some discrimination is good and different from other discrimination that is bad or why some prejudice is more tolerable than other prejudices.
If asymmetrical wokeism then operates with a necessary and correct imbalance accepted by most, then there will be nothing wrong. There will follow no backlash, no social chaos, in using race to denigrate others collectively.
There will be nothing wrong in ad nauseam using “whiteness,” “white privilege,” “white supremacy,” and “white terrorists’” in pejoratively stereotypical terms—collectively to apply to all 230 million deemed whites‚ whether the unemployed welder or the part-time junior college instructor or Bill Gates—in a way that it would be terribly wrong to talk pejoratively and collectively in terms of any other group.
If one collates all the things that have been said over the years about whites in general by Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan, or Maxine Waters, and yet more recently in more sophisticated fashion by the new generation of racialist-obsessed intellectuals such as Ta-Nehisi Coates, Ibram X. Kendi, Damon Young, or Elie Mystal, and then switched the terms white to black, would there be any outcry that it was becoming wrong to deductively extrapolate from individuals collective values and beliefs, and then, in circular fashion, reapply them to individuals as an innate trait?
We shall soon discover whether this tenet of wokeism—asymmetrical use of collective stereotyping—is widely accepted by 330 million Americans. We will soon see one of three consequences from this unapologetic woke racial generalizing:
1) The American people are so inured to their hateful origins and history, that they do not mind at all when whites are collectively demonized as enjoying positions they never earned and thus logically should not continue to enjoy.
Or,
2) Given that no one objects to stereotyping 230 million people, no one objects to anyone stereotyping others on the basis of race, in the manner that once fostered the civil rights movement.
Or,
3) We will all for survival, as Rwanda, the Balkans, and Iraq teach us, group together by first-cousin affinities and tribes. Recalling Hobbes’ bellum omnium contra omnes, we will freely stereotype, denigrate, and separate from other groups on the premises that our particular generalizations and deductions are the one and only true and accurate typecasting.
Artur Wida
Dr. Frankenstein and His Woke Monster
What made a 90 percent white population of the late 1950s and 1960s finally sicken of racial bias? Many things—protests, boycotts, the force of moral persuasion. But three things stand out.
One, segregation and bias were always contrary to the spirit of the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.
Two, these assumptions of racial prejudice were not predicated on any discernible science, logic, or coherent basis other than tribal bias, hatred, and ignorance.
Three, racial unfairness robbed the United States of critical talent by ignoring merit and substituting pseudo-scientific tribal affinities.
Yet by the emerging 1960s did anyone really believe that Perry Como de facto had a better voice than Harry Belafonte or Sammy Davis, Jr., that Sidney Poitier must be a less gifted actor than Frank Sinatra, that Hank Aaron was innately less impressive than Roger Maris, or that Senator Edward Brooke was less competent an American senator than Senator Herman Talmadge? Again, no.
Wokeness is returning to such tribal separation and crackpot categorization on the one assumption that its arbitrary rules will not alienate Americans as they finally did in the past.
So now are we to believe that non-whites can pick the race of their future roommates in colleges without audit or complaint? Farm aid shall be doled out to all except whites? Welfare in Oakland must exclude poor white recipients? Vaccinations will be targeted to non-white groups first? Will 330 million Americans grow to accept that racial typology will govern all state policy—in following a noble and successful historical precedent?
In each mass shooting, we shall broadcast the horror only if the shooter is white and his victims not so, but mute the story if the opposite should be true?
For noble purposes, criminal suspects shall not be identified by race unless they are white? It will be fine in advance to announce the gender and race of a vice-presidential candidate that mostly alone will determine the selection? We will massage data, and suppress or publicize statistics depending on their usefulness to the woke movement?
If blacks are disproportionately responsible for hate crimes against Asian Americans, we will keep still, or better yet nobly lie that whites are.
Such wokeness assumes that the Eastern Europeans never tired of their ministry-of-truth propaganda, that the cynical Soviet citizen never ignored Pravda’s assertions, or that Cubans really believe the Castro communiques.
Wokeness is either unaware of, or unconcerned with, the seething religious, caste, and racial tensions that plague India, or wrecked Lebanon, or unwound Yugoslavia. That is, the woke believe their Byzantine books of race-based exceptions, exemptions, and absolutions will convince 330 million Americans that segregation, or official untruth, are permitted, given historical circumstances and the common good.
But they will not.
Finally, wokeness takes for granted that its elite white Dr. Frankenstein architects will always control the prejudicial woke monster they created—on the assumption that one will never devour its creators. But history suggests ideologies often do just that.
Over the last two weeks, many of America’s most elite colleges seem to have deliberately restricted white admissions to around 30-40 percent of their incoming classes—on the altar of diversity and post-George Floyd wokeness. Yet, not every high-earning, bicoastal white liberal can give $10 million to Yale or Stanford or sire a likely future Major League Baseball star.
For the woke white elite, then, it will be hard to find some exemption from the rules that 70 percent of the population will be artificially recalibrated to 30 percent of the successful admissions.
A white liberal may have said “Who cares?” when hard-working Asians who represent six percent of the U.S. population were deliberately restricted to no more than 30-40 percent of the nation’s “best” colleges. But now? Will he really preen, “Bravo, my super-prepped, hyper-achieving prodigy got rejected at all the good schools and I’m so proud he took one for the woke team?”
Or what happens to the wannabe woke CEO who offered every sort of humiliating “unearned” confession, but nevertheless was still of the wrong color? Or what will be the mindset of the progressive, white male lieutenant colonel who found that his loud wokeness was mostly useful in preparing him to better understand why he should not be promoted to brigadier general?
It is OK for woke whites to be constantly accused of “unearned privilege” as long as their bicoastal billets were tolerably reduced by just 20 percent due to racial gerrymandering. But does their magnanimity extend to a 30-40 percent white jizyah, that cuts so close to progressive homes?
Will the brilliant actress in a blockbuster classic mumble, if even just privately, that she was the wrong color to be nominated as best actress?
Sure, some may feel that these are elite psychodramas. But for that reason, they will become mostly the angsts of the Left. The liberal white elite class engineered a system of woke racialism that they assumed rested on some sort of unspoken 70 percent white/12 percent black/10 percent Latino/six percent Asian, and two percent “other” formula that would always still leave them plenty of spoils while the unhappy consequences fell instead on Dotty the Deplorable, Charlie Chump, Cliff the Clinger, and Irene Irredeemable. They did not sign up for a 30-40 percent white allotment that cuts into the white woke; that is, the good and the morally superior whites.
So this, too, will be another of wokeism’s greatest tests, when elite writers, professors, actors, lawyers, newsroom grandees, and CEO magnificoes learn that they, too, can be of the wrong color under the new tribal prejudice they fostered.
Wokeism is creating a future group of politically incorrect Trotskyites on a proverbial rendezvous with a Mexican ice ax, given that by birth they will never be woke enough for the new Stalinism.
The
PM had planned to have a celebratory pint to mark the measures easing,
but that has been postponed following the death of the Duke of Edinburgh
on Friday.
Snow showers and chilly temperatures in parts of southern England
appeared to do little to dampen enthusiasm for outdoor pints or
early-morning queuing for shops and salons
Nicholas
Hair, landlord and owner of the Kentish Belle pub in Bexleyheath,
south-east London, said there was a "sense of celebration" in the early
hours of Monday as it opened to midnight customers.
"I'm hoping that this is a sort of rebirth, and that we are reopen for the foreseeable," he said.
Marika
Smith, general manager of Hough End Leisure Centre, Withington,
Manchester, said all of their swimming times were already fully booked
on Monday.
Kelly
Boad, owner of the Hair & Beauty Gallery in Warwick, opened her
salon at midnight for a symbolic "first cut" of 2021, adding she is
fully booked for the first few weeks.
Another
business that reopened at midnight in England was Secret Spa, which
offers at-home salon and spa treatments in London, Manchester and
Brighton.
Co-owner
Emily Ewart-Perks said it had "been such a long time coming", saying:
"Everyone has really missed the social contact of the day-to-day job and
making clients happy."
She said they have experienced a "surge of bookings", including "a lot of 6am haircuts".
Hairdressers, beauty salons and other close-contact services can open
Restaurants and pubs are allowed to serve food and alcohol to customers sitting outdoors
Gyms, spas, zoos, theme parks, libraries and community centres can all open
Members of the same household can take a holiday in England in self-contained accommodation
Non-essential journeys between England and Wales are allowed
Up to 15 people can attend weddings and 30 can attend funerals
Children can attend any indoor children's activity
Care home visitors will increase to two per resident
Driving lessons can resume, with tests restarting on 22 April
But
the British Beer and Pub Association has estimated that only 40% of
licensed premises have the space to reopen for outdoor service.
In
Northern Ireland, the remaining school year groups 8-11 will return to
the classroom. The stay-at-home message is being relaxed and up to 10
people from two households can meet in a private garden.
In
Scotland, pupils at schools in six council areas go back to school
today. Not everyone is returning on Monday because differing term times
mean some schools are still closed for the Easter holidays.
After
a drop in Covid cases prompted the Welsh Government to bring forward
some dates for reopening, all students will return to face-to-face
teaching on Monday.
Non-essential
shops can also reopen, close-contact services can resume, driving
lessons can restart and travel in and out of Wales from the rest of the
UK is allowed.
Ohio Representative Jim Jordan appears with Maria Bartiromo to discuss his visit to the U.S-Mexico border and what he personally witnessed. Jim Jordan outlines how the JoeBama administration is blocking people from documenting the scale of the crisis and concludes the resulting influx is exactly what the administration wants.
ANALYSIS – Many people (conservative media and politicians specifically) are misinterpreting the removal of the Biden administration’s Southern Border coordinator, Roberta Jacobson, from office. Jacobson was not removed from her position for being ineffective, her removal was announced because her goal was successfully accomplished. [It is frustrating to read THIS STUFF]
Let me be clear… Roberta Jacobson was put into position in January by those in control of the Biden administration specifically to coordinate this mass migration influx. Her mission was to create the crisis, not to prevent it. She was put into place to trigger the mass migration. How do we know this?….
When Roberta Jacobson was Ambassador to Mexico she was working against the policy of the Trump administration. She was running a covert effort to pipeline Central American immigrants through Mexico into the United States. Yes, Roberta Jacobson was part of the trafficking network; that is why she was removed from her position in March 2018… President Trump found out Roberta Jacobson was working with far-left immigration groups against his administration.
When Trump eventually found out what Jacobson was doing in Mexico, he quickly dispatched Jared Kushner to meet with Mexican officials and outline that Jacobson did not represent President Trump and she was fired. [Remember, this was before AMLO was elected]
But Kushner, Trump’s senior adviser and son-in-law who had no government or diplomatic experience before taking office … has been criticized for not including the outgoing U.S. ambassador in his meetings.
[…] After Wednesday’s meetings, however, it appeared there had been little progress in rescheduling. Mexican officials say both sides agreed that a future meeting will depend on how much progress is made on other issues, including NAFTA, migration, economic cooperation, and security, which would include Trump’s proposal for a border wall.
[…] U.S. Ambassador Roberta Jacobson, a 30-year veteran of U.S.-Latin America policy and top diplomat who has announced her resignation, was not in either of Kushner’s meetings with Videgaray or Pena Nieto, according to a statement and photos released by the Mexican government. She was also not even invited, according to The New York Times. .. (read more)
It must be remembered the spring of 2018 was when President Trump was pushing forward with the USMCA trade agreement to replace NAFTA and the former Mexican government was pushing back hard against it. President Trump announced he would initiate economic leverage against Mexico including tariffs if they did not comply with closing the NAFTA loopholes and supporting a new trade deal.
Videgaray and Nieto were fighting against President Trump and making threats to flood the U.S. with illegal aliens. In the background Ambassador Jacobson was working as an inside agent to assist Mexico against President Trump. Part of that effort by Ms. Jacobson was to organize and trigger the migrant caravan wave that happened in the fall of 2018.
The migrant caravan held a dual purpose of benefit for Ambassador Jacobson and the Mexican government:
(1) The caravan of immigrants was a coordinated ideological effort of the far-left, the open border community.
(2) The caravan of immigrants and the crisis they carried would be used as leverage by Mexican officials against Trump policy in the economic trade negotiations.
♦ In August of 2017 President Trump and Commerce Secretary Ross were discussing their trade efforts within NAFTA and renegotiation with Mexico/Canada on a trilateral basis. However, the U.S. administration said if it doesn’t work, they’d scrap the 3-way NAFTA deal and go one-on-one with individual bilateral agreements.
In response, Mexican Economic Minister Ildefonso Guajardo threatened to flood the U.S. with South American illegal aliens, criminals and gang members as leverage:
MEXICO CITY (Reuters) – Mexico could pull back on cooperation in migration and security matters if the United States walks away from talks to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, the Mexican economy minister said in a newspaper report published on Thursday.
“If they do not treat [us] well commercially, they should not expect us to treat them well by containing the migration that comes from other regions of the world and crosses Mexico,” Guajardo said. “Or they should not expect to be treated well in collaboration with security issues in the region.” (LINK)
However, Mexican Minister Ildefonso Guarjardo’s threat was mild compared to a threat in January 2017, when another Mexican official promised to flood the U.S. with South American drugs and gang violence:
♦ In a stunning segment on Fareed Zakaria’s CNN broadcast January 29th, 2017, Mexico’s former foreign minister, Jorge Castaneda, states the Mexican government was willing to counter U.S. President Donald Trump policy by unleashing drug cartels upon the U.S. border.
Watch, and more importantlyLISTEN, to his words at 02:10 below (Prompted):
This was the most politically explosive admission by the Mexican government in the past decade. Even Fareed Zakaria realized what was being threatened and quickly attempted to redirect the conversation.
Mr. Castaneda was openly admitting a willingness to promote drug trafficking. Additionally, Jorge Castaneda is so proud of the threat, he posted a video of the discussion on his own YouTube page.
This was the background battle in 2017. Mexican officials were working with U.S. State Department officials and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to block President Trump from enforcing immigration limits, border security, building a wall and then proceeding to get rid of NAFTA. The entire diplomatic corps, and Wall Street group which funds them, were trying to stop President Trump’s initiative.
Trump was waging this economic confrontation against Mexico at the same time he was dealing with North Korea nukes, moving trade policy in Southeast Asia, initiating tariffs against China and coordinating energy independence with peace in the middle-east. There was so much going on that almost no-one was paying attention to the issues in Mexico…. UNTIL the fall of 2018 when the Central American caravans hit the headlines.
Roberta Jacobson had coordinated the caravans and was fired by Trump in the spring of 2018. So when Biden hired Jacobson to be the border coordinator in January 2021 for 100 days (note the timeline was not accidental) she was installed specifically to trigger this massive influx of illegal aliens; which is an exact duplication of what she did in 2018 as Ambassador to Mexico.
Jacobson was always going to leave the administration after her successful mission. It was planned this way. The only reason she is leaving a little earlier is because she accomplished her task ahead of schedule. She is leaving early because she did better than JoeBama expected.
Let me be clear
