Tuesday, November 28, 2023

The Bidens Would Rather Snub All Their Grandkids Than Hang A Christmas Stocking For Navy Roberts



“The stockings were hung by the chimney with care” — but in Biden’s White House, how many are there?

Zero, according to photos of the State Dining Room, where the Bidens have adorned the mantle with stockings for their grandkids each Christmas since moving in. Later on Monday, First Lady Jill Biden will unveil this year’s Yuletide decor, which includes almost 15,000 feet of ribbon, nearly 100 trees, more than 350 candles, more than 142,000 twinkle lights, and close to 34,000 ornaments. It’s a holly, jolly extravaganza.

But amid all the excessive trimmings, the number of grandchildren’s stockings is the only quantity that really matters. Instead of recognizing their grandkids on the mantle, the Bidens are reportedly paying homage to their pets, one of which was exiled from the White House after biting Secret Service agents and a number of staffers. A spokesman explained that “[t]he family will be spending Christmas at Camp David” so “their family stockings will be there.”

But that’s not really why the grandchildren’s stockings aren’t featured at the executive mansion.

While 2023 marks the third year of the Bidens’ holiday oversight at the White House, this is only the first Christmas since the family finally publicly acknowledged their seventh grandchild: Hunter Biden’s love child, Navy Joan Roberts. For the past two years, Jill Biden has hung Christmas stockings for only six grandchildren, not seven, refusing to recognize and honor the innocent child born out of wedlock in 2018 to former stripper Lunden Roberts and the Bidens’ wayward son.

This was all part of the Bidens’ long-established “six grandchildren” narrative. As the president loved to tell, “I have six grandchildren, and I’m crazy about them. I speak to them every single day.” In 2020, Jill Biden dedicated her children’s book “To my grandchildren,” with a list of six names. And The New York Times reported over the summer that in White House strategy meetings, the president’s aides were instructed that Joe and Jill Biden have six grandchildren, not seven.

As the New York Post’s Jesse O’Neill wrote last Christmas, “The only thing worse than getting coal in your stocking is not even having one hung for you.” Indeed, and now the president and first lady are proving the depths of their disdain for Navy Roberts: They’d rather not acknowledge their other six beloved grandchildren than honor their seventh with a stocking.

The snub is even further aggravated by the Biden patriarch’s constant appeals to the importance of family in every other context. Entanglements in bribery scandals? No, just a father’s love for his son. Federal gun crimes? Nah, just a close-knit family grieving.

When it comes to little Navy Joan Roberts, however, Biden likes to play the family card again — in this case to tell inquiring minds to buzz off. “This is not a political issue, it’s a family matter,” President Biden told People magazine at the end of July when he first acknowledged the child. “Jill and I only want what is best for all of our grandchildren, including Navy.”

That’s a tough claim to square with reality, considering Joe Biden has aided and abetted the son he’s “very proud” of in ignoring his daughter. Hunter claimed in his memoir that he’s “taken responsibility” for the mess he created during his affair, but that’s not true. Instead of a meaningful relationship with her father — or even more than a delayed and compulsory acknowledgment of her existence after a positive paternity test — Navy has had to settle for child support payments he negotiated down and a few of Hunter’s lousy paintings. She can’t even have the Biden family name.

As for the grandparents, there’s still no evidence they’ve met their granddaughter.

So now what of this “family matter”? It’s about time Navy Joan Roberts gets a place of honor at the White House. But considering Joe and Jill Biden would apparently rather not recognize any of their grandkids than hang a little stocking for her, it’s painfully clear she’ll never have her place on their mantle — and certainly not a seat at their table.



X22, On the Fringe, and more- November 28

 




January 6 Was a Mostly Peaceful Protest

Criminalizing protest is the greatest threat to democracy


It has been nearly three years since the January 6 Capitol protest. For just as long, Americans have been force-fed a story about the fateful events of that day: even before the smoke cleared, and in many ways, it never did, the shambolic episode was labeled a deadly “insurrection.” The incoming administration was handed an invaluable support: they could now label anyone who doubted the legitimacy of their weak and doddering incumbent a suspect American, an “election denier” and a threat to “our democracy.” The narrative spread like a virus through the state-affiliated mass media, and became, arguably, the defining theme of Biden’s presidency.

In the name of defending democracy, Biden’s Justice Department launched the most ambitious law enforcement crackdown in the nation’s history – one targeting, exclusively, opponents of the party in power. It eventually came to target Donald Trump, the top threat to “our democracy” and, incidentally, or not, Joe Biden’s main political opponent. Prosecutor Jack Smith’s indictment of Trump is almost a work of plagiarism: it uses the same bombastic language as the January 6 committee, tells the same worn narrative, and takes the same creative leaps in logic, although Smith is less candid with his charges; he is curiously reluctant to use the word “insurrection.” To spare the trouble of proving his audacious case, Smith opts for the imprecise and verbose “events at the Capitol,” a phrase that appears no less than 15 times in a recent filing.

Which “events” are those, exactly? The truth is more banal than the narrative the American people have been told. If January 6 was an insurrection, it was among the most orderly, and uneventful in modern history. The newly released surveillance videos from Speaker Mike Johnson show hundreds of Trump supporters aimlessly meandering through the halls of the Capitol. Many have their smartphones out, taking videos of themselves or their surroundings. Many are dressed casually and move in a lackadaisical fashion, much like tourists. As they are calmly escorted out of the building, there is no sign that these people have any notion that they have been part of an insurrection. They have no idea what is coming – that they are about to become the targets of a nationwide witch hunt.

January 6 committee ringleaders Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger have accused the right of attempting to sanitize a “coup” with “cherrypicked” video. Neither Cheney nor Kinzinger allege the new videos are fake. The evidence simply does not conform with their maximalist interpretation of what happened, which is represented by a handful of dramatic clips played on an infinite loop on CNN. The suppressed surveillance tape of the famous “Qanon Shaman” comically ambling through the halls leaves a markedly different impression.

It is laughable to see the charge of historical revisionism levied over an event so recent in time, one so shrouded in political animosities and interests that are still active today. It can be no coincidence that those who have pieced together and promoted the prevailing narrative are hostile to new information coming to light.

What is already known publicly is enough to rebut the “insurrection” charge. It is no great secret that most January 6 protesters have not been accused of any violence. They face charges for crimes like trespassing and “obstruction of an official proceeding,” a crime which prior to January 6 had never been used to target political protesters, much less an American president. Nevertheless, they have been treated like terrorists. Some, such as the odd but benign shaman, have suffered greatly in solitary confinement.

The January 6 protesters have always been treated differently, not because of their actions but because of their beliefs. They have been broken down and pressured to recant “The Big Lie.” Smith’s indictment accuses Trump of having created an “an intense national atmosphere of mistrust and anger” with “disinformation” about voter fraud. What of those who whipped up mass hysteria following the death of George Floyd? To this day, no evidence has surfaced to support the claim that Floyd was the victim of a racially motivated murder, and countervailing evidence of a drug overdose has been dismissed. Still, his death was instantly labeled a modern-day lynching, an act of wanton violence from police hellbent on hunting black men. The massive destruction fueled by this narrative, targeting courthouses, police stations, and even the White House, was not condemned as threatening to the nation’s bedrock institutions; it was dismissed as a distraction from a righteous and “mostly peaceful” struggle.

Since January 6, the government has pursued a campaign of vengeance out of all proportion to the facts and Biden’s very tenuous mandate. There are plenty of reasons for a rational person to doubt the outcome of the 2020 election, given the extremely close margin, the intense emotional investment of Trump’s enemies in defeating him at any cost, and the irregular, if not illegal, manner of the election itself. In any case, it does not matter what the January 6 protesters believed. In a democracy, the government does not decide which grievances the people are permitted to have; it cannot command them to reject “lies” and embrace sanctioned “truths.”

The January 6 protesters have been persecuted for exercising the core civil rights of American citizens. It is hard to imagine a more direct threat to democracy than the criminalization of protest, but that is just what our government has done.



Swalwell Gets Leveled With Reality After He Raises Question About Trump, Biden on Middle East


Nick Arama reporting for RedState 

We saw MSNBC's Joe Scarborough and former Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill make a laughable defense of Joe Biden, comparing him to former President Donald Trump in the Middle East, saying the world could spin into World War III without Biden. McCaskill even said it was Trump who had a problem of coherence as opposed to Biden. Sorry, Claire and Joe, as I noted, the American people don't agree with you. 

But it's looking like maybe this was the talking point for the day, because Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) made a similar comparison, referencing World War III. 

First, he said he thinks we should pressure Israel to do "more" to reduce civilian casualties, and he said Biden was doing that. That's clueless, as Israel is already doing all it can. To push more is to try to tie their hands behind their backs when they're fighting a war against terrorists. 

Then Swalwell made the laughable comparison. "If Donald Trump was president if he was elected at this time, can you imagine what the scenario would be in the Middle East? It would probably be the United States and Israel in a World War III - type scenario with Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas."

It's truly funny because, yes, indeed, we can imagine how things would be. Trump was president before, so we can tell Swalwell exactly how it would have gone since he seems ignorant on the matter. It was a period of unprecedented peace in the Middle East, with peace treaties like the Abraham Accords signed. Not to mention no new wars.  It was a period where people understood that America was strong and feared getting on our bad side. When Russia bombed too close to our troops in Syria, they immediately had bombs dropped on them. Trump also showed strength by taking out Iran's Qassem Soleimani. 

Swalwell said that Biden hasn't put any troops into the conflict and that he was getting "aid into the region." That response shows yet again how clueless he is.

Biden helped to create a mess by coddling Iran and funneling money to them when they supported the terrorism of groups like Hamas, which then attacked Israel, causing the present war. Even after the attack on Israel and even after Iranian proxies attacked our assets and troops more than 52 times, the Biden team was talking about cutting billions more loose to Iran. Trump didn't make the same ridiculous moves that have emboldened our enemies around the world. Our troops have been fired on dozens of times now, with dozens of injuries, yet the very limited response from the Biden team has not been effective.

The comparison is stark, and it's not good for Biden. If Trump were in office, we probably wouldn't have the two wars that the world is dealing with now: Ukraine and Israel. So yes, please, do keep spreading this talking point, Democrats. People already know the difference with how bad Biden is on the economy compared to Trump. It's good to make a point about foreign policy as well. 

Rosalynn Carter honored by family, friends, first ladies and presidents -- including husband Jimmy

 

ATLANTA (AP) — Rosalynn Carter was being memorialized Tuesday with classical music and beloved hymns, some of her favorite Biblical passages, and a rare gathering of all living U.S. first ladies and multiple presidents, including her 99-year-old husband Jimmy Carter in the front row.

The tribute service at Glenn Memorial Church in Atlanta marked the second day of a three-day schedule of public events celebrating the former first lady and global humanitarian who died Nov. 19 at home in Plains, Georgia, at the age of 96. Tributes began Monday in the Carters’ native Sumter County and continued in Atlanta.

“My mother was the glue that held our family together through the ups and downs and thicks and thins of our family’s politics,” Chip Carter, her son, said as the service began.

The former president, who is 10 months into home hospice care and hadn’t been seen in public since September, watched from his wheelchair, reclined a bit with his legs up and covered by a blanket, with his daughter Amy holding his hand.  


 https://apnews.com/article/rosalynn-carter-funeral-jimmy-joe-biden-def25a63701d39a1516da25015e48683   






Constitution Scholar: Lawfare Punishing Me For Advising Trump Will Cost Me $3 Million

John Eastman has been harassed unceasingly since assisting Trump in 2020 constitutional litigation.



Three lawsuits attempting to bankrupt a constitutional scholar for giving the prior Republican president legal advice will cost him $3 to $3.5 million, John Eastman said Friday. Eastman was a target of Democrats’ illegal Jan. 6 Committee and has been harassed by the FBI and courts since assisting Donald Trump in 2020 constitutional litigation.

“This is what I call the authoritarian moment in our history,” Eastman told reporter Julie Kelly and podcast cohost Liz Sheld. “The whole premise here is: ‘The government has spoken and you continue to say otherwise. Therefore you must be lying.'”

Eastman’s legal defense fund has raised more than half a million dollars so far, “less than a third of what we’ve already incurred and less than about a sixth or seventh of what we’re likely to incur before we’re done,” Eastman said. To defend himself legally in a Georgia prosecutor’s case against Trump and dozens of his associates, Eastman needs to raise $1 million by February, he said: “I’m trying very hard not to completely deplete my wife’s retirement fund.”

“When our founders pledged their lives and their fortunes and their sacred honors to create a government of a free people with free institutions, they put everything on the line,” he responded when Kelly asked how he and his wife are holding up. “And we are at a crossroads in our country on whether we’re going to go back to a tyrannical form of government where we are subjects, not free citizens, or whether we are going to fight like our forefathers fought and our foremothers fought, for liberty.”

“And so I happen to have been thrust into a role where I can participate in that fight, and I draw strength from that knowledge and from the people that lend support to us because they recognize how important the fight is.”

Spikes in the Driveway

For the last year, Eastman told Kelly and Sheld, protesters have stood at the end of their street. Unknown individuals kept burying four-inch spikes in their dirt driveway, Eastman said, which ruined multiple sets of tires until they spent “a lot of money” on a security system. They’ve had feces thrown onto their property and keep fielding nasty emails and phone calls. They’ve referred multiple threats to the state police and FBI, he said.

Besides the personal threats, Eastman is being targeted by three lawsuits as a result of giving legal advice to the last Republican president: a disbarment trial in California, the latest special counsel’s attempt to handicap Republicans in the 2024 elections, and the Georgia Trump trial. A Chapman University law professor for 20 years and law school dean for four, Eastman recently retired over colleagues’ smears.

In the last 20 years, he was involved in more than 200 major constitutional cases before the Supreme Court, including advising Florida’s Legislature on Bush v. Gore. Eastman is also a Claremont Institute legal scholar and former U.S. Supreme Court clerk, as well as an Eagle Scout, former Boy Scout troop leader, and former member of his church’s choir.

‘Front-and-Center Case’ on Election Disputes

California’s far-left bar association “made this the front-and-center case challenging all the election issues,” Eastman said. Witnesses have been affiliated with leftist projects to disbar all lawyers who provide a legal defense to conservatives. Those include The 65 Project, advised by Media Matters founder David Brock. Media Matters is infamous for media smear operations to erase conservatives’ participation in the public square, over which Elon Musk recently filed suit.

Brock told Axios The 65 Project would “not only bring the grievances in the bar complaints, but shame them and make them toxic in their communities and in their firms…You’re threatening their livelihood.” Besides targeting Eastman and the more than 100 lawyers who helped Republicans with election litigation in 2020, The 65 Project is pushing bar associations to disbar any lawyers who help Republicans in election-related litigation, Axios reported. The initiative has filed bar complaints against, among dozens of others, the Republican attorneys general of Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, Louisiana, Missouri, Mississippi, Montana, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia, and more.

Notoriously leftist bar associations are using their licensing monopoly to deprive conservatives of high-quality counsel. Texas’ state bar is going after the state attorney general. The New York bar notoriously stripped Trump counsel Rudy Giuliani of his law license. The Arizona state bar is attempting to disbar a local prosecutor for charging Antifa rioters while hundreds of prosecutors filed no charges or only misdemeanors against the domestic terrorist organization.

Trampled Constitutional Law Questions

Eastman is primarily being targeted for his legal advice to Trump following the 2020 election. Mark Pulliam summarizes: “Eastman was the architect of a strategy to postpone the certification of electoral votes on January 6 pending a resolution of challenges in key states.”

The 2020 election turned on 10,000 to 20,000 vote differences each in three states: Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. For 2020, those states implemented brand new and, courts have subsequently ruled, at least partially illegal mass mail-in balloting systems. That means even statistically small numbers of illegal votes — such as those illegally harvested, not mailed by the legally required date, or not completed properly — easily could have tipped the election. Voters deserved to have such concerns investigated to maintain trust in the country’s electoral integrity, Eastman said.

When then-Vice President Mike Pence counted the electoral votes on Jan. 6, 2021, he had letters from more than 100 state lawmakers in swing states saying, “Our election was conducted so illegally, so contrary to the manner we had set out under our constitutional authority to do so, that these elections should not have been certified,” Eastman summarized. “We have been blocked by our governors not calling us into special session to deal with this in any formal way. Please give us a week or 10 days now that we’re back in formal session to conclude our investigations and to make our best judgment about what ought to be done about this illegality.”

With the majority of other constitutional scholars on this issue, Eastman believes “Pence had the authority. He didn’t want to exercise it.”

Contrary to media claims, Eastman said, he didn’t argue for Pence to “gavel Trump elected.” He argued for Pence to pause the certification for a week or two so state legislatures, to whom the Constitution gives full power to choose presidential electors, could decide how to address evidence of illegal voting within the election margin of error.

Politicians ‘Lie Straight Out of Their Face’

“We don’t live by fact anymore, we live by false narratives repeated over and over again until they look true because they’ve been repeated so often,” Eastman said of far-reaching false claims about his legal advice in 2020 election cases, which have resulted in not only his departure from his law school deanship but also losing multiple posts, including with the University of Colorado.

“I don’t mind having disagreements with people — I mean, that’s the nature of politics,” Eastman said. “What I do mind is that people, one, lie straight out of their face to you and, two, distort what you said in order to, you know, defame you. And his [Pence’s] team on this has done both.”

Voters seem to understand that, Eastman commented, because Pence was among the first to drop out of the 2024 presidential race despite significant support from establishment money. The same is true of unpopular candidates like Liz Cheney, Chris Christie, and Nikki Haley, he said.

Politicos “seem not to understand the disconnect between the political expert class who don’t know their butts from a hole in the ground and the rank-and-file Americans, who know more about the Constitution and the limitations on government and the notions of what freedom means and what a free people are willing to do to remain free than any of these jerks in Washington or the New York-D.C. corridor.”

Eastman’s legal team must file their closing briefs by Friday, Dec. 1. After that, the judge, who has a long history of donating to Democrats, has 90 days to issue her ruling. The judge cannot disbar him, but if she recommends his disbarment, his law license will be suspended during any appeals, Eastman said.

“We are living in George Orwell’s 1984: When the government says two plus two is five, you better not only repeat it but believe it or we’re going to destroy you,” he said.



NewsGuard Is Selling Its Government-Funded Censorship Tool To Private Companies


Because NewsGuard worked with the Defense Department to test its technology, it seems likely the government had some input in determining what qualified as ‘disinformation.’



The for-profit censorship giant NewsGuard is now selling its “Misinformation Fingerprints” technology to private companies to silence Americans’ speech — technology the federal government helped NewsGuard develop to the tune of nearly $750,000 in taxpayer funding. So while NewsGuard is now making headlines for trying to take down Elon Musk’s X, the bigger story concerns the federal government’s funding of the censorship-industrial complex.

NewsGuard launched a Thanksgiving-week attack on the social media company former known as Twitter, claiming some 200 ads from prominent advertisers appeared on feeds of users spreading lies about the Israel-Hamas war. Elon Musk returned fire, calling NewsGuard “a propaganda shop” that “uses these reports to pressure companies to buy their ‘fact-checking’ services.”

“It’s a profit over any principle model,” the X owner countered.

The verbal sparring between Musk and NewsGuard is likely to continue for some time, but the war on free speech being waged by NewsGuard extends much beyond X and is being subsidized by our tax dollars.

“In September 2021, NewsGuard was awarded a grant through the Small Business Innovation and Research program, which funds early-stage companies to develop products and technologies that can be helpful for government,” NewsGuard announced in its 2021 Social Impact Report. “Under the grant,” the report explained, “NewsGuard plans to further develop the Misinformation Fingerprints tool and test the effectiveness of the Fingerprints in detecting state-sponsored disinformation campaigns.”

Federal records show the Department of Defense funded the Small Business Innovation and Research program’s award of nearly $750,000 to NewsGuard for the further development and testing of the Misinformation Fingerprints tool. And according to NewsGuard’s 2021 Social Impact Report, its “Misinformation Fingerprints” catalog traced “762 false narratives,” “providing one-of-a-kind tracking seeds for the AI tools used by defense industry clients.”

By the following year, NewsGuard reported in its 2022 Social Impact Report that its “Misinformation Fingerprints” technology had accumulated 1,122 supposedly false narratives and been “deployed at scale” — including by social media companies. Since then, NewsGuard has highlighted the use of the Misinformation Fingerprints tool by social media companies “seeking to mitigate falsehoods on their platforms…”

“For example the Ethos Network, an ethical social media app targeting Gen-Z users, has integrated NewsGuard’s Misinformation Fingerprints and associated ‘debunks’ into its user interface,” NewsGuard bragged, claiming its technology enabled “users to verify the content of their posts before publishing them.” 

In addition to the Ethos Network, NewGuard reports that GIPHY, the online search engine and database of GIFS, was one of the first companies to use the Misinformation Fingerprints dataset, “to quickly identify and address content that risks spreading misinformation through its platform.” Microsoft also uses NewsGuard’s “fingerprints” technology “to train Bing Chat.”

NewsGuard currently markets its Misinformation Fingerprints technology to a variety of entities, including tech giants and organizations with AI and social-listening tools. That technology, NewsGuard promises, allows false claims to be intercepted, while facilitating the sharing of accurate information. 

Like its other offerings, NewsGuard’s Misinformation Fingerprints tool relies on the research of its supposedly “trained analysts and misinformation experts,” meaning that the same defects seen in its rating of news outlets likely permeate the Misinformation Fingerprints. NewsGuard also markets its Misinformation Fingerprints to be used “in conjunction with NewsGuard’s reliability ratings,” promoting that combined technology to the advertising industry to be used to “redirect ad spend away from purveyors of misinformation and towards sources of quality journalism.”

American taxpayers thus paid for NewsGuard “to further develop the Misinformation Fingerprints tool,” which NewsGuard then deployed at scale, marketing the censorship technology to social media companies and advertisers to silence and starve disfavored speech. And because NewsGuard worked with the Department of Defense “to test the effectiveness of the Fingerprints in detecting state-sponsored disinformation campaigns,” it seems likely the government had some input in determining what qualified as “disinformation.”

NewsGuard has since attempted to walk back its earlier boast that it had received a government grant to develop its Misinformation Fingerprints tool, framing the $750,000 award as a licensing fee. But whether a grant or a licensing fee, the scandal remains the same: Our government funded and helped develop censorship technology designed to silence American speech. And the award to NewsGuard is just one example, with the federal government awarding more than 500 contracts or grants related to so-called mis- or disinformation since 2020. 

These facts also should not be considered in isolation, but rather viewed in light of the federal government’s efforts over the last five years to coerce social media companies to censor disfavored speech. 

So yes, NewsGuard’s efforts to silence speech and to destroy the financial survival of disfavored outlets and social media companies is a problem. However, fighting NewsGuard’s anti-American attack on free speech isn’t enough. Rather, it is the totality of the federal government’s efforts to control speech that must be destroyed — or our freedom of speech will be.



New COVID Study Shows Those Who Complied With Restrictions Have Worse Mental Health


Possibly you recall when in early 2020 we were all exposed for the first time to the term COVID and over the next year were inundated with fear and even propaganda about what would happen if we tried to live as we had before January 2020. 

The government rushed through a vaccine while telling everybody to constantly wash their hands (not a bad idea), wear masks (that really didn't do much), and follow all their dictates, or you might be responsible for some innocent person dying.  

Well now, almost four years after that first hit on our collective consciousness, a study is out saying that people who followed everything their governments were telling them to do suffer from certain mental ailments like depression and anxiety.

Seems to me it makes sense.

The study was conducted in Wales and the results were just published here.

People who complied more strictly with COVID-19 restrictions have worse mental health today, according to a new study.

Researchers analysed the behaviour of around 1,700 people in Wales during lockdown brd on their personalities and mental health post-pandemic.

They found that people who reported complying with COVID-19 restrictions were the least likely to resume normal activities.

If you know anyone who followed what Fauci and the government minders here in this country were saying, you will probably be nodding vigorously about this point. I know I am.

They were also more likely to experience stress, anxiety, and depression today.

Participants were asked to answer questions about their attitudes to COVID-19 and actions during the first part of the pandemic from March to September 2020. 

This period included many public health restrictions on movement and social gatherings.

Researchers also questioned 230 friends or family of those involved in the study to cross-check participants’ answers.

They followed up with 850 participants and asked them to report their levels of stress and mental health every two weeks between February and May 2023.

I'm not a doctor and know just a limited amount about viruses, so I can't sit here and speak as though I'm an expert. 

I worked for over a decade in Industrial Coatings and knew that what our public health authorities were telling us about a basic cloth mask was absolutely nonsense about protecting yourself or anyone else. Government authorities were making this such a point of contention that if you were not wearing a mask, you were possibly spreading COVID-19 to others who were wearing masks, and then you might kill them, which I laughed at.

Now in retrospect, I can see where people had the fear of God put into them about what amounted to not even a Band-Aid, and being told they may be killing somebody unknowingly would probably put them under a lot of stress. 

Then the ultra-draconian move of telling folks and encouraging businesses to force employees to get a vaccine that had not gone through normal FDA time trials or their job would be in jeopardy would absolutely crush most people. Even those who were more than happy to go along with each and every recommendation, which turned out in most cases to be a bit of a knee-jerk reaction, had to feel a bit of confusion and whiplash about how fast things moved.

New York led the country in confusion for a bit with how fast the governors would issue mandates.

Variant Mania: New York Governor Issues Mandates Just Like Her Predecessor, Cuomo

Sometimes, it seems that it doesn’t really matter what warm body is in the New York Governor’s office because they will all act the same. This appears to be the case with newly installed Madame Governor Kathy Hochul, who recently replaced the old putrid and kinda creepy Andrew Cuomo. You remember Andrew, he is the older brother of Fredo, who has that sweet gig over at CNN that hardly anyone watches.

Governor Hochul seems to have decided to follow good ole Andrew’s playbook on how to deal with the new variant coming out of South Africa, which is really just the same way other variants of the “Cove” were dealt with. Possibly, she was not paying attention to how well that all went down when she was the Lt. Guv and honestly, you can’t blame her being it is a cushy gig with a sweet check for doing nothing.

From The Detroit News

She said the variant hasn’t yet been detected in the state but that she decided to sign an executive order to allow the health department to limit non-essential, non-urgent procedures at hospitals and acquire critical supplies more quickly. The order takes effect Dec. 3 and will be re-assessed brd on the latest data on Jan. 15.

“We continue to see warning signs of spikes this upcoming winter, and while the new omicron variant has yet to be detected in New York state, it’s coming,” Hochul said.

Earlier in the month, Hochul blamed vaccine holdouts for a rise in hospitalizations, saying that a worsening situation was avoidable if people would get the shots. She also discouraged large indoor gatherings for Thanksgiving, saying then that “we are heading into a vulnerable time.”

So the new Governess thinks that prepping for the new variant by preventing people from having stuff done or gathering for Thanksgiving indoors will help reduce hospitalizations. That advice was so 2020, back when we didn’t have the “vaccinations” to save us all. Yet, being I heard this argument last year, how about if we check to see how the vaccination rate in the Empire State is currently sitting?

With the same types of policies and confusion being exhibited in Michigan, California, and New Jersey, which also happened to be states led by Democrats, is it really any wonder that the aftermath would be confusion and then depression?

The long-term effects of how governments around the world reacted to this, both in terms of Mental Health and also the effects of the jab, are going to take many, many years to sort out.

Usually, it takes years possibly decades for studies to come out with enough information on the long-term effects of certain things that the government is studying.  This is why looking back clearly now, there should have been much more opposition to the mandates that were being implemented with very little data or science behind them.

That people's livelihoods and even lives were threatened for questioning any of this should have been a red flag and should have caused the vast majority of the people, at least in this country, to stop and say hold on.

If the results from this study are an indication of how people around the globe will end up responding to what was done in the early days of the pandemic, I find no joy in the irony that the people who suffered the most possibly will be the ones who questioned the least.




Mitt Romney Says He’d Vote for a Democrat Before Trump or Ramaswamy



This is an exceptional moment of mask dropping for those of us who tried desperately to get people to understand the nature of the UniParty and Mitt Romney in 2012.  Now, Utah Senator Mitt Romney says he would vote for a Democrat, even Joe Biden, before he would vote for President Trump or Vivek Ramaswamy.

Keep in mind, Romney was the “approved Republican” in the 2012 field.  Let these remarks stand as a bold underline to the true nature of the professional UniParty in Washington DC.  “I’d be happy to support virtually any one of the Republicans, maybe not Vivek, but the others that are running would be acceptable to me, and I’d be happy to vote for them,” Romney said to CBS news host Norah O’Donnell.

“I’d be happy to vote for a number of the Democrats too. I mean, it would be an upgrade from, in my opinion, from Donald Trump, and perhaps also from Joe Biden,” Romney added.  Showcasing once again how the professional GOP apparatus creates the illusion of choice through the cloistered two club system.  WATCH:



Think about the nature of what Romney is really saying here.  Vote for Chris Christie, Nikki Haley or Ron DeSantis, and if not – vote for a Democrat, because they are the same.

Do not be upset about Romney’s commentary.  Instead, look at it carefully for the value it represents in trying to awaken people to the nature of the enemy that resides deep inside the Republican apparatus.