You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘censorship’ tag.

Yesterday’s post covered Piers Morgan’s polemics, which cost him his job last week.

In the latter half of last week, Scotland passed what appears to be a draconian Hate Crime Bill, the subject of today’s post on censorship in Britain.

Thanks to BBC Parliament, I saw some of the debate in the Scottish Parliament in Holyrood a few weeks ago. I was grateful to the Scottish Conservatives who raised many questions about the scope and the reach of the then-proposed legislation.

On March 10, 2021, the day before MSPs passed the legislation, Lucy Hunter Blackburn wrote an excellent article for Holyrood: ‘Chilling effect: how the Hate Crime Bill threatens free speech’.

Excerpts follow, emphases mine.

The article begins with the wide ranging opposition the bill had received:

The bill has had an exceptionally difficult passage to date, prompting criticism from a range of organisations, including at various times the Faculty of Advocates, the Law Society, the BBC, the National Secular Society, the Catholic Church and a raft of writers and artists.

Much of the objection revolves around the precise definition of ‘stirring up hatred’ in Part 2 of the bill, particularly with the trans movement being active in Scotland. In fact, the article has a photo of trans rights activists to illustrate the point:

In particular, significant concerns remain in relation to issues around sex and gender identity, and the risk of furthering chilling effects in an area of debate that people are already afraid to enter.

The Scottish Government and some commentators have downplayed such worries, insisting that people will not be criminalised for making basic statements about the nature of sex and gender identity, in ordinary language.

A leading lawyer tweeted: “in my opinion of the bill (if enacted) it will not be criminal to criticise the government. Nor will it be criminal to say there are only two genders. Neither involves stirring up hate, or is threatening or abusive.”

But the risks here are more subtle. And not for the first time, subtle risks are not being dealt with well in the process of making law, and seem to be least apparent to those least expecting to be affected.

The article looks at the language used in Part 2 of the legislation:

The bill as amended at Stage 2 requires that behaviour must be judged “abusive or threatening” by a “reasonable” person, and “intended to stir up hatred”. None of these terms are further defined.

MSPs have taken the view that the meaning of all these words will be obvious, and they will “set a high bar”.

Yet this overlooks the mass of evidence presented over the course of the passage of the bill that demonstrates what is hateful, abusive, and reasonable is substantially contested in the context of discussing sex and gender identity.

Even before this legislation was passed, women in Scotland were in danger of losing their jobs for expressing their opinions on the subject of sexual identity:

… women have already lost their jobs, and had their details recorded on police databases for asserting that sex matters.

This is probably how the legislation would work in practice:

In practice, a person will only have to find a police officer willing to entertain the idea that particular statements are intended to “abusive”, to trigger an investigation into whether a group or individual intended to stir up hatred.

What might an investigation entail? Organisations representing journalists giving evidence to the committee spoke about the serious professional and personal disruption of having laptops and phones seized, for unknown periods.

It would be likely to mean police interviews. It would be a non-trivial experience, even if charges were not pursued. This [is] broadly what happened to veteran feminist politician Lidia Falcon in Spain, before the authorities decided she had no hateful intent.

Before contemplating the possibility of going to court, let alone the likelihood of receiving a conviction, the sole barrier to a large disruptive criminal justice system intervention in a person’s life is, therefore, the application by the police of the “reasonable person” test of being “abusive”.

Guessing how that might be applied if or when someone complains will now hang over people. How it is actually applied will be the difference between ordinary life and sudden, substantial disruption to that.

Earlier this year, MSPs attempted to bring in amendments to the Bill that would have protected freedom of speech, but the backlash outside of Holyrood was too great:

Following a social media backlash and accusations of transphobia, opposition MSPs and the Cabinet Secretary for Justice hastily withdrew all these amendments, and agreed to take a ‘collaborative’ approach to discussing a generic wording for a Stage 3 amendment on freedom of expression instead.

The justice secretary apologised for any hurt caused by singling out particular characteristics. The convener of the justice committee, Adam Tomkins, stated that he was “‘alarmed and distressed and perhaps even, if I’m honest, a little afraid” by how this had played out.

In committee, the justice secretary refused to state that there are only two sexes.

More recently, Labour MSP Johann Lamont unsuccessfully attempted to bring in another amendment with a list of words that would not be considered threatening:

This includes asserting that sex is a physical, binary characteristic that cannot be changed, that terms such as ‘man’ and ‘woman’ refer to the characteristic of sex, and that a person’s sex may be relevant to their experience.

On 5 March, the Equality Network and Scottish Trans Alliance circulated a briefing to all MSPs, advising voting against this amendment, describing such statements as sending a message that that “trans people’s rights are open season for attack”.

The article concludes:

If the bill is passed in the form the government is seeking, while it will not make certain types of statements about sex and gender identity criminal in themselves, the freedom to do so without risking at least serious disruption to life will now rest wholly on what frontline police officers decide in practice a “reasonable person” might judge “abusive” here.

Given the evidence presented to the parliament, and the passage of the bill to date, that feels like a very thin blue line, making Scotland look an increasingly hostile place for anyone who believes it is ever important to have the freedom to see, name and discuss the relevance of sex.

Later that day — March 10 — The Scottish Sun posted an article: ‘Hate Crime Bill: Humza Yousaf faces anger as law gives protection for “cross-dressers” but not women’.

Humza Yousaf is Scotland’s justice secretary.

The article says, in part:

The Justice Secretary’s controversial law introduces an offence of “stirring up hatred” against groups with “protected characteristics” of race, religion, disability, transgender identity, sexual orientation and age – punishable by up to seven years in jail

But Labour MSP Johann Lamont – backed by a list of other MSPs – were angry that the Bill does not provide protection for women, but does for cross-dressers.

Tonight, Ms Lamont said that the Scottish Government recently confirmed that they hold no data on cross dressers being a target of hate crime – despite collecting data on the characteristic from 2009.

However, she pointed out that women, goths, and homeless people are not covered by the Bill – despite plenty of evidence they have been targeted for serious offending. 

Ms Lamont told the Scottish Parliament: “The Cabinet secretary has talked about ‘a man who is not a trans woman but wears a dress for a drag performance’. 

“The Equality Network has brought up the example of a man dressing up for a night out at the Rocky Horror Show, and also of men who cross dress for what they term ‘emotional need’. 

“When women are would be likely to be recognised as cross dressers is obviously much less clear. 

“Why do we believe occasional hatred to crossdressers should be covered in this bill, but not hatred towards all the other groups I have mentioned, but most especially women.”

In response, Mr Yousaf said: “In my view these amendments would limit the protections in the Bill and remove protections already provided within the existing definition of Transgender identity within the offence as aggravation by prejudice, Scotland Act 2009. 

“While ensuring existing protection is not lost which is a very important point indeed, people who cross dress are also included in the Bill because they experience hate crime.” 

However, SNP and other MSPs rejected separate amendments that would have added sex to the protected characteristics, and also removed the protection for cross dressers from the Bill.

The move prompted outrage online with thousands of women posting the hashtag #iamthestorm in response to sex not being included.

One woman fumed: “Welcome to McGilead, a country so progressive that men on a stag do, wearing dresses, have more rights than actual women.”

Another said: “Scotland, under the first female FM, has become a place where women discussing, challenging and debating issues regarding their sex is fast becoming a crime. They can’t win the argument so they have made the argument a crime.”

The pro-independence SNP lead Scotland’s parliament. Nicola Sturgeon is First Minister.

Yet, not everyone in the SNP was on board with the law, including former deputy leader Jim Sillars:

Local and parliamentary elections will be taking place in May.

George Galloway, a Scot who moved back to his homeland from England to run for office, is part of the new political party, All(iance) 4 Unity, standing in direct opposition to the SNP, agreed with Jim Sillars:

The BBC reported that Scots are concerned about conversations they have in their own home:

Scottish Conservative MSPs Adam Tomkins and Liam Kerr have proposed amendments that they say will protect free speech in private – something the new law doesn’t offer.

Their amendments are related to the so-called “dwelling defence” that already exists in relation to stirring up racial hatred.

Mr Tomkins – who is also convenor of Holyrood’s justice committee – said his move to protect speech “wholly in private” is in line with the right to respect for privacy and a family life.

He told BBC Scotland: “I’m not seeking to insulate everything that happens in the home.

“But I am seeking to say there is a zone of privacy that is protected by European human rights law. We all have the right to respect for our private and family life.

“If something is happening wholly in private, with no public element at all, then it should be safeguarded from the Hate Crime Bill.”

Mr Yousaf said: “If you are sitting round the dinner table having a debate about transgender identity and your view is that a man can’t transition to a woman, that won’t get you prosecuted.

“If your behaviour is found to be threatening or abusive by a reasonable person and it was intended to stir up hatred – and that can be proven beyond reasonable doubt – then you will be prosecuted.”

The bill came up for final debate and successful vote on Thursday, March 11, having overrun from Wednesday. The debate can be viewed here.

Pete (Runrig) Wishart, an SNP MP in Westminster, seemed critical of the Conservatives, the only party opposing the legislation:

Would that other parties had opposed the bill:

The pro-independence site, Wings Over Scotland, strongly objected to the bill’s passage. In ‘The Wrecking Crew’, the Rev Stuart Campbell, who founded the site, wrote:

For the last couple of years this site has been critical of the SNP’s failure to make any sort of progress on independence. But this is far, far worse even than that. Because if they somehow miraculously achieved independence tomorrow, we’d be afraid to live in the Scotland they’re creating.

Our country doesn’t have a SINGLE political party remotely fit for government. Voters in May face a choice between the evil, the stupid, and the evil and stupid. And they can’t even be angry about it, because even the politest anger is now a hate crime.

We wish we had a constructive course of action to suggest to you, folks. But we don’t, because democracy has failed you. There is no way you can vote that will fix the ruins the SNP have made of Scotland. We cannot see a way forward. It is becoming nearly impossible to evade the conclusion that all is lost. Nicola Sturgeon has destroyed it.

The deputy editor of Country Squire magazine tweeted his objections to the bill:

Women are concerned that seeking the privacy of a ladies’ restroom is under threat as a man who self-identifies as a woman will have more ‘right’ to use that facility than they:

Lily of St. Leonards posted on the ethical dilemmas in this legislation involving a potential confluence between a variety of hate categories. ‘Humza’s hate crimes‘ is well worth reading in full. On women, she says:

If I am taking off my clothes in the woman’s changing area of a swimming pool and I see someone with male anatomy, am I allowed to politely ask them to leave? What if this person says, “I am a woman” and finds my attitude hateful, insulting and discriminatory? Will I be convicted of a hate crime in Scotland if I tell the person I don’t believe it is possible for men to become women?

For female politicians on the left, however, the problem goes much deeper. Some have been the subject of truly hateful, obscene messages for not toeing the party line on sexual identity, as The Herald‘s Kevin McKenna pointed out on Sunday, March 14 in ‘Hate Crime Bill: Do women’s rights not matter to this authoritarian SNP?’ He wrote:

The problem here though is that, judging by social media, the SNP has been hollowed out by a vociferous group of illiberal nasties who seem determined to view reasonably-expressed opinions – especially around gender – as evidence of hate speech.

A significant number of them also seem to derive pleasure from threatening women (never men), both online and in person. Joan McAlpine, the most prominent SNP critic of the Hate Crime proposals has had a target crudely drawn on her Twitter profile amidst explicit threats of sexual violence towards her. Other female members have left the party because their own complaints about similar treatment have been ignored by the leadership.

Joanna Cherry is an SNP MP at Westminster who has also been the subject of a vicious campaign:

I’ve previously been disobliging of several of Nicola Sturgeon’s Labour predecessors but none would have scoured the floor of the swamp as she did a few weeks ago when she whistled up the bullies on the party’s scarecrow wing before sacking Joanna Cherry from the front bench of her Westminster team.

Yesterday, at Edinburgh sheriff court a man pled guilty to sending Ms Cherry messages that were grossly offensive, menacing and included threats of sexual violence. The messages were sent days after the First Minister’s intervention.

Ms Cherry says that allegations of transphobia made against her from within her own party “put a target on her back”.

This week Ms Cherry was the only Scot named on a list of the 100 most inspirational women at Westminster. In the SNP, though, she is considered a pariah and has endured a two-year campaign of intimidation and bullying. This is a party where strong, talented women of independent minds are considered a threat rather than an asset. Its failure to make sex a protected characteristic in their Hate Crime Bill is the final proof – if any were still required – that the SNP does not take women’s safety and wellbeing seriously.

Joanna Cherry has also been a QC (Queen’s Counsel) since 2009:

Regular readers of McKenna’s columns point out that his critical article could mark a turning point for the SNP:

Jamie Blackett, the leader of the new All for Unity (Alliance4Unity) party of which George Galloway is a member, says that this legislation creates a dangerous precedent:

As Lily of St Leonards notes in her aforementioned post:

Nothing should limit my right to write freely about any topic including even if other people find that writing hateful and insulting. Letting their perception of hatred limit my ability to write and speak freely means there is a special group of people living in Scotland who can in theory control what the rest of us say write and do. But it is mere prejudice that elevates these people above everyone else and it is disgraceful that the Scottish Parliament has in effect created a form of reverse Apartheid in Scotland.

This also means that teasing — called ‘flyting’ in Scotland — is out, as Iain Macwhirter pointed out in ‘So what will independence be if SNP no longer protect freedom of speech?‘ for The Herald:

The abuse is, of course, an ironic form of affection, of bonding – a demonstration that your relationship is so strong that you can playfully abuse each other. But it’s something that is almost impossible to explain in the age of social media and the tyranny of the literal. And with the SNP’s Hate Crime Bill now passed into law, flyting is finally grounded.

He points out that hate crimes have already been covered under legislation for 11 years:

threatening and abusive behaviour is already illegal, not least under the 2010 Criminal Justice Act. Incitement to racial hatred is also illegal.

Existing legislation means that even a passer-by could notify the police:

You don’t even have to be a “victim” yourself. Anyone who overhears something offensive can report a hate incident and the police will be required by law to record it. This will rarely lead to actual prosecution, but it carries a punishment nevertheless. The mere recording of a hate incident will hang around the neck of whoever is accused of it, and could be dredged up when they apply for jobs involving childcare or race relations.

It looks as if the only recourse will be the courts. Such an action has worked before:

Most ordinary SNP members are mystified as to why the Hate Crime Bill ever saw the light of day. It threatens to be even more perverse and indiscriminate than the Scottish Government’s Offensive Behaviour at Football Act, which criminalised football supporters and had to be repealed in 2018. It is arguably worse than the named persons scheme, which sought to install a state guardian for every child, and was struck down by the UK Supreme Court because it infringed the European Convention on Human Rights.

All for Unity pledge to repeal the new legislation if they win a majority in May:

As Spiked noted:

Scotland is in serious trouble of becoming the land of the unfree.

Indeed.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out between now and May’s local elections.

Last week, the United Kingdom saw three significant developments curbing freedom of expression.

This post explores the first incident.

On the morning of Monday, March 8, 2021, the nation received snippets of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex interview with Oprah Winfrey.

ITV broadcast the interview in full that evening.

ITV is also home to Good Morning Britain (GMB), the rival programme to BBC Breakfast.

Until last week, Piers Morgan was a co-host on the show with Susanna Reid. Weatherman Alex Beresford also sits down to join in the conversation.

ITV recruited Piers several years ago to help prop up the show’s sagging ratings. The strategy worked. Regardless of what one thinks of him, he is a polemicist sans pareil.

On September 25, 2019, the show welcomed then-MP Rory Stewart (Conservative) to talk about the court case against Boris Johnson’s prorogation of Parliament and Brexit. It was a dismal time for the Government.

Piers noted that Stewart had won the award from GQ: Politician of the Year.

The Express reported (emphases mine below):

“You’ve had the old GQ curse,” Morgan added. “Because I was made GQ’s Editor of the Year and later GQ’s TV Personality of the Year, both cases I lost my job that I got it for within several months.

Rory Stewart became confused and walked off the set, by mistake. For whatever reason, he thought the interview was over.

However, although Piers Morgan’s remark was blunt, it ended up being true. Not only did Stewart not stand for re-election in December 2019, he also packed in his campaign to run for Mayor of London in 2020.

On November 18, Morgan rightly took issue with Prince Andrew’s interview with the BBC’s Emily Maitlis. The Express reported about Morgan’s tweet, which read:

“Brilliant forensic dissection by @maitlis – desperate, toe-curling bulls*** from Prince Andrew.

“Why on earth did he do this? Insane.”

Morgan is known for his continuous tweeting. One wonders how he manages to find time to do anything else.

On Friday, December 13, there was a right royal row on GMB after Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour lost in the worst drubbing since 1935. I watched this and it was magic. The Conservative pundit Iain Dale, who was part of the mostly female panel, actually walked off the set. This was pure ratings heaven, partly thanks to Piers Morgan:

The Sun has more about Morgan’s scathing views of Labour and celebrity Remainers from that day.

Here’s one of his tweets, which, like it or not, is spot on:

In 2020, just after the New Year, the Sussexes announced they would be pursuing their life together away from the Royal Family.

Morgan tweeted furiously on January 8, replying to cricketer Kevin Pietersen:

He tweeted about their announcement, his dislike of the Duchess, his disappointment in the Duke, the couple’s hypocrisy, their media rules, the shabby way they treated the Queen and his criticism of people who know nothing about the Royal Family.

The following day, Morgan wrote a column for the Daily Mail railing against the couple. The newly elected Conservative MP Jonathan Gullis was so taken aback that he invited the Duchess to his constituency of Stoke-on-Trent North to see the sights:

Guido Fawkes has more on the story.

By the middle of January 2020, the couple were living in Canada. Piers’s column for the Daily Mail on January 15 criticised the Duchess for visiting a homeless women’s shelter. He tweeted like mad that day, too.

The Mail promoted his article:

One week later, Morgan and weatherman Alex Beresford had a discussion about the backlash against the Duchess. Both points of view are understandable, but you can see Morgan’s skill as a polemicist in play, thanks to his long background as a journalist and tabloid editor:

The perspectives in that exchange resurfaced in March 2021.

On Monday, March 8, before the interview was aired, GMB had ITV’s royal correspondent Chris Ship on to discuss the snippets that had appeared so far from Oprah’s interview broadcast in the US on Sunday:

Already, there were calls for Piers to go:

Tuesday, March 9, proved to be the final straw. Here he is with Alex Beresford discussing the interview which ITV had aired the night before. Piers had enough and walked off:

He later returned to finish the show:

Remember that a big part of a polemicist’s role is to attract attention. In the case of GMB, Morgan was after ratings. He was not wrong.

Like it or not, his strategy worked:

Hours later, he and ITV agreed he should leave GMB (more here):

Here is a short version from the Daily Mirror‘s Showbiz Editor Mark Jefferies:

The next day, Chris Ship tweeted that the Duchess had complained about Morgan’s polemics:

In his farewell tweet to his colleagues, Morgan mentioned ratings. Job done!

A lot of people seriously dislike Piers Morgan. I am in complete disagreement with his support of the Government’s coronavirus damaging strategy. Americans dislike him for his views on gun control. Millions of Britons are angry with him about his views on the Sussexes.

However, there is something important for us to bear in mind, in Piers Morgan’s own words:

We have to get comfortable talking about the uncomfortable.

I fully agree. We used to be able to have civilised debates on television. Sadly, we have lost the ‘lively art of conversation’, as the late Chicago talk show host Irv Kupcinet used to say.

In closing, Piers Morgan encouraged the participation of his son in last summer’s protests and tweeted about it at the time.

So, rather than censor, let’s have the maturity to discuss and listen to all points of view, few of which are as binary as censors — official or unofficial — like to claim.

President Trump spoke at CPAC on Sunday, February 28, 2021, in Orlando.

Anyone missing his rallies will enjoy his closing address, which lasted about an hour. I watched RSBN’s coverage, which was excellent. The video covers the whole day, so go to the 8-hour mark to see the speech:

UPDATE ON THE VIDEO — March 4:

For now, it is available from the American Conservative Union and a well respected news site:

Liberty Nation has a good version of the transcript. I’ve made a few edits in the excerpts below. Emphases are mine.

President Trump began by thanking CPAC organisers Matt and Mercedes Schlapp. Mercedes Schlapp worked on Trump’s communications team during his presidency and also on his 2020 campaign. He also acknowledged Rush Limbaugh’s widow, Kathryn:

Thank you very much and hello, CPAC. Do you miss me yet? A lot of things going on. To so many wonderful friends, conservatives, and fellow citizens in this room, and all across our country. I stand before you today to declare that the incredible journey we began together – we went through a journey like nobody else. There’s never been a journey like it, there’s never been a journey so successful. We began it together four years ago, and it is far from being over.

Our movement of proud, hard-working – and you know what this is? The hardest working people, hardworking American patriots – is just getting started. And in the end, we will win. We will win. We’ve been doing a lot of winning. As we gather this week, we’re in the middle of a historic struggle for America’s future, America’s culture, and America’s institutions, borders, and most cherished principles.

Our security, our prosperity, and our very identity as Americans is at stake – like, perhaps, at no other time. So, no matter how much the Washington establishment and the powerful special interests may want to silence us, let there be no doubt, we will be victorious, and America will be stronger and greater than ever before.

I want to thank my great friends, Matt and Mercedes Schlapp. Matt, thank you. Thank you, Mercedes. Thank you very much. And the American Conservative Union for hosting this extraordinary event. They’re talking about it all over the world. Matt, I know you don’t like that but that’s okay. All over the world. I also want to pay my love and respect to the great Rush Limbaugh, who is watching closely and smiling down on us. He’s watching and he’s loving it and he loves Kathryn. Kathryn, thank you for being here. So great. Thank you, Kathryn. He loved you, Kathryn, I will tell you that. Fantastic. Thank you, Kathryn, very much.

He put paid to rumours about a new political party. There will not be a new party. Trump aims to take over the Republican Party:

To each and every one of you here at CPAC, I am more grateful to you than you will ever know. We are gathered this afternoon to talk about the future of our movement, the future of our party, and the future of our beloved country for the next four years. The brave Republicans in this room will be at the heart of the effort to oppose the radical Democrats, the fake news media, and their toxic cancel culture – something new to our ears, cancel culture. And I want you to know that I’m going to continue to fight right by your side. We will do what we’ve done right from the beginning, which is to win.

We’re not starting new parties. They kept saying, he’s going to start a brand-new party. We have the Republican Party. It’s going to unite and be stronger than ever before. I am not starting a new party. That was fake news, fake news. Wouldn’t that be brilliant? Let’s start a new party and let’s divide our vote so that you can never win – no, we’re not interested in that.

Mr. McLaughlin just gave me numbers that nobody’s ever heard of before, more popular than anybody – that’s all of us. Those are great numbers and I want to thank you very much. Those are incredible numbers. I came here and he was giving me 95%, 97%, 92%. I said they’re great, and I want to thank everybody in this room and everybody all throughout the country – throughout the world, if you want to really know the truth. Thank you.

We will be united and strong like never before. We will save and strengthen America and we will fight the onslaught of radicalism, socialism, and indeed it all leads to communism, once and for all. That’s what it leads to. You’ll be hearing more and more about that as we go along, but that’s what it leads to – you know that.

Not surprisingly, he spoke a lot about the disastrous Biden administration:

We all knew that the Biden administration was going to be bad, but none of us even imagined just how bad they would be and how far left they would go. He never talked about this. We would have those wonderful debates – he would never talk about this. We didn’t know what the hell he was talking about, actually.

His campaign was all lies. Talked about energy – I said, you know, this guy, actually he’s okay with energy. He wasn’t okay with energy. Wants to put you all out of business. He’s not okay with energy. He wants windmills – the windmills that don’t work when you need them.

Joe Biden has had the most disastrous first month of any president in modern history. Already, the Biden administration has proven that they are anti-jobs, anti-family, anti-borders, anti-energy, anti-women, and anti-science. In just one short month, we have gone from America First to America Last – you think about it, right? America last.

He spoke about the wall along the southern border, which requires closing the gaps in places:

We did such a good job; it all worked. Nobody’s ever seen anything like we did, and now he wants it all to go to hell. When I left office just six weeks ago, we had created the most secure border in U.S. history. We had built almost 500 miles of great border wall that helped us with these numbers, because once it’s up – you know they used to say a wall doesn’t it work well. You know what I’ve always said: walls and wheels, those are two things that will never change.

The wall has been amazing, it’s been incredible, and little sections of it to complete, they don’t want to complete it. They don’t want to complete little sections and certain little areas, they don’t want to complete, but it’s had an impact that nobody would have even believed. It’s amazing, considering that the Democrats’ number one priority was to make sure that the wall would never, ever get built – would never, ever happen. We’d never get financed – we got financed. We ended catch and release, ended asylum fraud, and brought illegal crossings to historic lows. When illegal aliens trespassed across our borders, they were promptly caught, detained, and sent back home. And these were some rough customers, I want to tell you – some rough customers were entering our country.

I had hoped he would have said ‘bad hombres’, as he did in 2016, but, perhaps wisely, he did not.

He continued:

It took the new administration only a few weeks to turn this unprecedented accomplishment into a self-inflicted humanitarian and national security disaster. By recklessly eliminating our border security measures, controls, all of the things that we put into place, Joe Biden has triggered a massive flood of illegal immigration into our country, the likes of which we have never seen before. They’re coming up by the tens of thousands. They’re all coming to take advantage of the things that he said, That’s luring everybody to come to America. And we’re one country, we can’t afford the problems of the world, as much as we’d love to – we’d love to help, but we can’t do that.

So they’re all coming because of promises and foolish words. Perhaps worst of all Joe Biden’s decision to cancel border security has single-handedly launched a youth migrant crisis that is enriching child smugglers, vicious criminal cartels, and some of the most evil people on the planet, you see it every day just turn on the news, you’ll see it every day.

Under my administration, we stopped the child smugglers. We dismantled the criminal cartels. We greatly limited drug and human trafficking to a level that nobody actually thought was possible and the wall helped us a lot. And we protected vulnerable people from the ravages of dangerous predators and that’s what they are dangerous, dangerous predators. But the Biden administration has put the vile coyotes back in business and is done so in a very, very big way.

Under the new administration, catch and release has been restored. Can you imagine? We worked so hard. Catch – you know what that is – you catch them, you take their name. They may be killers, they may be rapists, they may be drug smugglers. You take their name and you release them into our country. We did the opposite. We not only didn’t release them, we had them brought back to their country, illegal immigrants are now being apprehended and released along the entire southern border – just the opposite of what it was two months ago. They weren’t coming because they couldn’t get in. Once they think they can get in they’re coming, and they are coming at levels that you haven’t even seen yet – by the hundreds of thousands, by the millions, they’ll be coming.

The Biden administration is now actively expediting the admission of illegal migrants, enabling them to lodge frivolous asylum claims and admitting them by the thousands, and thousands and thousands a day; crowded together in unsanitary conditions despite the ongoing economic and public health crisis, COVID-19 – or, as I call it, the China virus.

He made a short announcement:

This alone should be reason enough for Democrats to suffer withering losses in the midterms and to lose the White House decisively four years from now. Actually, as you know, they just lost the White House, but it’s one of those things. But who knows, who knows? I may even decide to beat them for a third time, okay?

Trump said that his administration has already paid for the completion of the gaps in the wall. All that needs doing is the work itself:

Joe Biden defunded the border wall and stopped all future construction, even on small open sections that just needed to be finished up – routine little work. It’s already been bought. Wait ’til the contractors get to him and they say no, it costs us much more money not to finish this small section than if we finished it – that’s going to be nice. Wait ’til you see those bills start pouring in.

He talked about another amnesty, which is probable:

To top it all off, the Biden people are pushing a bill that would grant mass amnesty for millions of illegal aliens, while massively expanding chain migration – that’s where you come in and everybody comes in; your grandmother, your father, your mother, your brother, your cousins. They come in so easily. So crazy. It even requires that the U.S. government provide illegal border crossers with taxable funded lawyers. Anybody need a good lawyer? You can’t have one. They get the lawyers. They’re probably very good, too.

He then discussed coronavirus, beginning with schools that are still closed:

The Biden administration is actually bragging about the classroom education they are providing to migrant children on the border, while at the same time millions of American children are having their futures destroyed by Joe Biden’s anti-science, school closures. Think of it, we’re educating students on the border, but our own people, children of our citizens – citizens themselves – are not getting the education that they deserve.

There’s no reason whatsoever why the vast majority of young Americans should not be back in school, immediately. The only reason that most parents do not have that choice is because Joe Biden sold out America’s children to the teachers’ unions. His position is morally inexcusable – you know that. Joe Biden has shamefully betrayed America’s youth, and he is cruelly keeping our children locked in their homes. No reason for it whatsoever. They want to get out.

They’re cheating the next generation of Americans out of the future that they deserve – and they do deserve this future. They’re going to grow up, and they’re going to have a scar. It’s a scandal of the highest order and one of the most craven acts by any president in our lifetimes. It’s the teachers’ union – it’s the votes. And it shouldn’t happen and nobody has more respect for teachers than I do. And I’ll bet you a lot of the people within that union, they agree with everything I’m saying. Even The New York Times is calling out the Democrats.

The mental and physical health of these young people is reaching a breaking point. Tragically, suicide attempts have skyrocketed, and student depression is now commonplace and at levels that we’ve never seen before. The Democrats now say we have to pass their $1.9 trillion boondoggle to open schools, but a very small part of it has to do with that. You know where it’s going – it’s going to bail out badly run Democrat cities, so much of it. But billions of dollars for schools remain unspent from the COVID relief bills that were passed last year.

So on behalf of the moms, dads, and children of America, I call on Joe Biden to get the schools open and get them open now.

He talked about Operation Warp Speed’s success in obtaining coronavirus vaccines and treatment for the American people:

When I left office – and we’re very proud of this because this was something that they said could not be done; the FDA said it, everybody said it, and the article you read said it couldn’t be done, it would be years and years – I handed the new administration what everyone is now calling a modern-day medical miracle. Some say it’s the greatest thing to happen in hundreds of years. Two vaccines produced in record time with numerous others on the way, including the Johnson and Johnson vaccine that was approved just yesterday – and therapeutic relief also if you’re sick.

If you’re sick, we have things now that are incredible – what has taken place over the last year under our administration would have taken any other president at least five years and we got it done in nine months. Everyone says five years …

I pushed the FDA like they have never been pushed before. They told me that loud and clear. They have never been pushed like I push them. I didn’t like them at all, but once we got it done I said, I now love you very much.

What the Trump administration has done with vaccines has, in many respects, perhaps saved large portions of the world – not only our country but large portions of the world. Not only did we push the FDA far beyond what the bureaucrats wanted to do, we also put up billions and billions of dollars – ten billion – to produce the vaccines before we knew they were going to work. It was called a calculated bet or a calculated risk. We took a risk. Because if we didn’t do that, you still wouldn’t have the vaccines, you wouldn’t have them for a long time so think of that; we took this bet. We made a bet, because we thought we were on a certain track, but you’d be starting to make them right now. It’d be a long time before you ever saw. It takes 60 to 100 days to manufacture and inspect new doses. And that means that 100% of the increased availability that we have now was initiated by our administration

Joe Biden is only implementing the plan that we put in place. And if we had an honest media, which we don’t, they would say it loud and clear. By the time I left that magnificent house at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, almost 20 million Americans had already been vaccinated – 1.5 million doses were administered on my final day alone. Yet Biden said, just a few days ago, that when he got here – meaning the White House – there was no vaccine. He said there’s no vaccine. Oh, good, say it again, Joe. Now, I don’t think he said that, frankly, in a malicious way – I really don’t. I actually believe he said that because he didn’t really know what the hell was happening.

Never let them forget this was us, we did this, and the distribution is moving along according to our plan – and it’s moving along really well. We had the military, what they’ve done – our generals, and all of the peoplewhat they’ve done is incredible. But remember, you know, we took care of a lot of people, including, I guess, on December 21 we took care of Joe Biden, because he got his shot, he got his vaccine – he forgot. It shows you how unpainful that vaccine shot is, so everybody go get your shot.

He spoke about his policies of peace:

When I left office, we had virtually ended the endless wars, these endless wars they go on forever. They go on forever. I would go to Dover and I would see caskets, coffins coming in, I’d see the parents and wives and husbands I would see the kids, endless wars 19 years in Afghanistan, we have it down to almost nothing left and I hear they might want to go back in Iraq, remember I used to say don’t go in, but if you’re going to go and keep the oil well we went in and we didn’t keep the oil.

We had made historic peace deals in the Middle East, like nobody thought were even possiblenot a drop of blood. By the way that one American soldier has been killed in Afghanistan in over a year, think of that, not one those troops have largely come home at the same time, the new administration unilaterally withdrew our crippling sanctions on Iran foolishly giving away all of America’s leverage before negotiations have even begun. Leave the sanctions, negotiate.

Then he addressed the Biden administration’s fawning attitude towards the WHO and China:

And another horrendous surrender: he agreed to get back into the World Health Organization for approximately $500 million a year which is what we were paying. When I withdrew from the WHO and you know the whole story with that they called it badly. They really are puppets for China. They called and they wanted us to stay in. I said, ‘How much are we paying, approximately $500 million? How much is China paying … in terms of population country?’ ‘Sir, they’re paying $39 million.’ I said, ‘Why are we paying 500 million and they’re paying 39?’ I can tell you why. Because the people that made the deal is stupid. That’s why.

So, so, and I had no idea how popular was we I didn’t even know if I would be able to politically because people were so happy when I did get out. But I said so we went in, we could get it for 39 million, which is what China not 500 million, which is what we were stupidly paying and they said, We can make a deal we want you to go in, we can make a deal. Okay, and I did, I decided not to do it. We could have had it for 39, we could have had it for the same as China, and they decide now to go back into the World Health Organization and pay 500 million. What the hell is wrong with them?

He talked about the Paris Climate Accord:

Just like Iran and the World Health Organization Joe Biden put the United States back into the very unfair and very costly Paris Climate Accord without negotiating a better deal. They wanted us so badly back in. I’ll tell you they wanted us. I was getting called from all of the countries: ‘You must come back into the Paris Accord’. I said, ‘Tell me why. Give me one good reason.’ First of all, China doesn’t kick in for 10 years, Russia goes by an old standard which was not a clean standard and other countries, but we get hit right from the beginning when it cost us. Hundreds of 1000s and millions of jobs; it was a disaster.

But they go back in. I could have made an unbelievable deal and got back in but I didn’t want to do that, surrendering millions of jobs and trillions of dollars to all of these other countries, almost all of them that were in the deal, so they have favorable treatment. We don’t have favorable treatment and we just had we’re going back in to go back in, they wanted to so badly. You couldn’t negotiate if you wanted to go back in, which, frankly we have … the cleanest water and everything else that we’ve ever had.

He discussed Biden’s cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline, the folly of wind power and the price of petrol over the past few weeks:

One of his first official acts, which was incredible, because, again, he talked about energy. He never said he was going to do this. He cancelled the Keystone XL pipeline, destroying not the 8000 or the 9000 or the 11,000 jobs that you hear, but 42,000 great paying jobs on just about day one, right? He never talked about that during a debate, because he wouldn’t have gotten away with it …

We cannot let this stuff continue to go on, but one of my proudest accomplishments as president was to make America energy independent. The United States became the number one energy superpower, number one. Number one, bigger than Saudi Arabia, bigger than Russia by a lot. We left them all in the dust

How bad is wind power? So, I talked about it all the time …

The wind isn’t blowing. I don’t believe we’ll have any electricity … It’s such an important such an expensive form of energy. It’s so bad for the environment, it kills the birds, it destroys the landscapes. And remember, these are structural columns with fans on them, they wear out, and when they were out all over the country you see them, nobody takes them down, they’re rotting, they’re rusting. How this is environmentally good for our country?

And it costs, many, many times more than natural gas … [Natural gas] can fuel our great factories. Wind can’t do that and, and solar, I love solar but it doesn’t have the capacity to do what we have to do to make America great again. Sorry, it just doesn’t happen under the radical Democrat policies.

The price of gasoline has already surged 30% since the election, and we’ll go to $5 $6 $7 and even higher. So enjoy that when you go to the pump, because it’ll be about $200 to fill up your van … It’s a shame what’s happening, energy prices are going to go through the roof, and that includes your electric bills. That includes any bill having to do with energy our biggest costs.

We will now be relying on Russia and the Middle East for oil and they talk about Russia, Russia, Russia. What’s better than what this guy’s done for Russia?

He deplored what is happening to women’s sports:

Joe Biden and the Democrats are even pushing policies that would destroy women’s sports … Hate to say that, ladies, but a lot of new records are being shattered. … Now, young girls and women arebeing forced to compete against those who are biological males

Now I think it’s crazy. I think it’s just crazy what’s happening. We must protect the integrity of women’s sports, so important. Controversial. Somebody said, ‘Well, that’s gonna be very controversial’. I said, ‘That’s okay’.

He defined Trumpism, a word he says he did not coin. However, he defended this new movement and pointed to his administration’s record:

Many people have asked what is Trumpism, a new term being used more and more. I’m hearing that term more and more, I didn’t come up with it. But what it means is great deals, great trade deals, great ones

Did you see grain prices and grain sales are at an all time high? We are at an all time high … We did a lot of work with the tariffs and all these things that we had to do to get it and now the farmers are doing greatthey’re setting records.

It means low taxes and eliminating job killing regulations. Trumpism, it means strong borders, but people coming into our country based on a system of merit … It means no riots in the streets, it means law enforcement. It means very strong protection for the Second Amendment and the right to keep and bear arms. It means support for the forgotten men and women who have been taken advantage of for so many years, and they were doing great.

They were doing great before that horrible thing from China came in and hit us, and now they’re starting to do really well againNo country comes even close to competing with our comebackA strong military and taking care of our vets but a strong military, which we have totally rebuilt. We have rebuilt it. And our military has never been stronger than it is today. It was tired, it was depleted, it was obsolete and now we have the best brand new equipment ever made. And it was all produced right here in the USA.

And we take care of our vets. You know, we had a poll recently just before leaving office, the vets had a 91% approval rating for the way we took care of them, that’s the highest number in the history of the polls. But on top of all of that. We have even created the Space Force the first new branch of the United States military in nearly 75 years …

The mission of our movement and of the Republican Party must be to create a future of good jobs, strong families, safe communities a vibrant culture, and a great nation, for all Americans, and that’s what we’re creatingThe culture of our country, our party is based on love for America, and the belief that this is an exceptional nation, blessed by God.

We take great pride in our country. We teach the truth about history. We celebrate our rich heritage and national traditions we honor, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln Thomas Jefferson and national heroes. And of course, we respect our great American flag.

He received a lot of applause with that and thanked the audience several times.

He continued:

We are committed to defending innocent life and to upholding the Judeo Christian values of our founders and of our founding. Free thought. We stand up to political correctness, and we reject the left wing lunacy, and, in particular, we reject cancel culture. We know that the rule of law is the ultimate safeguard. And we affirm that the Constitution means exactly what it says. As written, as read

That is the essence of Trumpism.

I’ve covered only half of President Trump’s speech. The other half can be found here.

Afterwards, he received a standing ovation from nearly everyone in the crowd.

President Trump’s speech closed the CPAC conference. It’s hard to imagine a better ending to it and a better beginning to 2021 for Republicans.

Shortly after Joe Biden’s inauguration, Fox News posted two interesting videos.

The first was one I never thought I would see. In fact, I hadn’t even imagined it.

Laura Ingraham managed to get an interview with Glenn Greenwald, formerly of The Intercept, which he co-founded. Not so long ago, the publication told him to take a hike. They did not like that he opposed ‘their’ editorial line. Greenwald, although hardly a conservative, questioned current leftist narratives.

Glenn Greenwald is not a fan of Donald Trump, but even he can see that Big Media have clearly overstepped their bounds.

Laura Ingraham begins the segment with three minutes of Inauguration Day coverage contrasting 2021’s with 2017’s. Even Greenwald says he could barely stomach it:

He said that the media react in three ways: a) basic whining, b) complaining that the public can see through media lies and c) downright censorship.

Greenwald said that the public’s

lack of trust will continue to worsen, undoubtedly.

Ingraham asked about the militarisation of Washington, DC. Greenwald posited that the media had to create a story that invoked fear — domestic terrorism — because talking about Joe Biden would have been too dull.

Ultimately, he said that the media want the people to be subservient to the elites and that is why they are

spinning these stories.

He also said that the Democrats want to bring in a

new War on Terror bill.

It would deal with what is perceived to be domestic terrorism:

all designed to entrench powers in their hands that we would otherwise agree they should never have.

Too true.

Tucker Carlson also discussed this on his show around the same time:

Glenn Greenwald said that Adam Schiff (D-California) has been trying to bring in a domestic terrorist threat bill since 2019.

Tucker Carlson introduced another Democrat legislator with the same intent in mind. His name is Rep. Brad Schneider (D-Illinois). No one outside of his constituency or state has ever heard of Brad Schneider. Tucker wonders who put Brad Schneider in charge of the First Amendment.

Tucker’s video goes on with video clips of two other legislators who want to restrict the right to free speech and freedom of assembly, because Americans doing so — Americans with conservative values — are ‘harming’ other Americans.

Unbelievable.

Both videos are worth your time: 13 minutes in total.

Please watch and circulate.

Dems and their water carriers in the media do not have the Constitution in mind with these proposed laws.

Tucker, in particular, makes a valid and impassioned defence of the First Amendment. He read history at university, so he’s not a ‘media studies’ kind of journalist.

America has always been the freest country in the world.

May the Great Republic always be so. May these censors and charlatans cease and desist from removing fundamental American rights from the people.

Four years ago at this time, I was lukewarm about Kevin McCarthy, the Republican (Minority) Leader in America’s House of Representatives.

He represents California’s 23rd District, so he knows a lot about the state’s politics.

He wasn’t too keen on Donald Trump in 2016, but, since then, he got on board the Trump Train and makes a lot of sense.

Below are some of his latest and greatest tweets.

The 2020 results for the House

Six days after the 2020 election, he tweeted:

He also had a go at Nancy Pelosi’s predictions about the election results. She was so wrong:

2020 election censorship

On Wednesday, December 9, YouTube posted a statement: ‘Supporting the 2020 U.S. Election’.

It reads in part (emphases mine):

Yesterday was the safe harbor deadline for the U.S. Presidential election and enough states have certified their election results to determine a President-elect. Given that, we will start removing any piece of content uploaded today (or anytime after) that misleads people by alleging that widespread fraud or errors changed the outcome of the 2020 U.S. Presidential election, in line with our approach towards historical U.S. Presidential elections. For example, we will remove videos claiming that a Presidential candidate won the election due to widespread software glitches or counting errors. We will begin enforcing this policy today, and will ramp up in the weeks to come. As always, news coverage and commentary on these issues can remain on our site if there’s sufficient education, documentary, scientific or artistic context.

While only a small portion of watch time is election-related content, YouTube continues to be an important source of election news. On average 88% of the videos in top 10 search results related to elections came from authoritative news sources (amongst the rest are things like newsy late-night shows, creator videos and commentary). And the most viewed channels and videos are from news channels like NBC and CBS.

NBC and CBS weren’t biased, were they?

Kevin McCarthy was quick to respond. He’s absolutely right. There was nothing like this in 2016:

Praise for Trump’s historic five peace deals in four months

On Thursday, December 10, the Trump administration made history once again, with yet another exceptional peace deal, where people said none could be done.

Yes, Donald Trump is the Peace President:

I couldn’t agree more:

China

A week ago, I wrote on Orphans of Liberty about the revelations that a female Chinese spy was active in California and the Midwest for several years (see the part on China). The principal politician involved was Rep. Eric Swalwell. The Chinese national, Fang ‘Christine’ Fang, met him when he was councillor for a San Francisco Bay area town, Dublin City. At the time, she was a student at California State University East Bay and affiliated with the Chinese Student Association.

Swalwell was first elected to US Congress in 2012. He was re-elected in 2014. Fang was his ‘bundler’ for campaign contributions. That was ideal for her and for China. She ended up placing a few political interns in his offices, including one in Washington, DC.

Fang overplayed her hand in the months to come. By 2015 — and this was during Obama’s second term — the FBI was on to her. They gave Swalwell a defence briefing about Fang and he put an end to his association with her.

Nonetheless, Swalwell has served on the House Intelligence Committee for several years. He is still serving on the House Intelligence Committee.

Furthermore, few people are more vocally anti-Trump than Eric Swalwell. He was one of the principal peddlers of the ‘Russian collusion’ narrative.

Kevin McCarthy nailed it with this tweet from Tuesday, December 8:

The following day, he explained to Laura Ingraham of Fox News that Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi nominated him to that committee. Did Madam Speaker know about Swalwell’s connections? If so, she never should have nominated him:

On Monday, December 14, he also had a go at Adam Schiff, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, about Swalwell. Schiff, also a Democrat, is another US legislator from California:

This is his message for the next session of Congress, when the Speaker of the House position is once again up for grabs:

Coronavirus lockdowns

For me, however, this is Kevin McCarthy’s best tweet:

Yes, they do, indeed.

In August, he tweeted:

Yet, the longer lockdowns and restrictions go on, the more people are likely to believe small business closures, particularly those in the hospitality sector, are a way of letting either big firms or the Chinese in to buy vacant property.

Yesterday, Howie Carr interviewed a restaurant owner from the North End in Boston who has a long-established restaurant that is opening and closing at the whims of city officials and the Massachusetts governor. The man was fighting back tears. This is not easy — at all. He said he does not know what is going on but he says that all the benefit is going to big corporations rather than to him and his brother as well as other small business owners.

When I found McCarthy’s ‘lockdowns destroy livelihoods’ tweet, I’d also spotted a prescient comment from someone who has been an ex-Democrat since 2008. The comment is excerpted below:

Why are all the Dem leaders so blatantly cold & heartless & PUNITIVE towards destroying people’s lives…while continuing to party in their own lives

Why would Cuomo & DeBlasio let NY turn into a ghost town? and Newsome & Garcetti let the great state of California & the once grand city of Los Angeles die a slow death to the point of driving even Silicon Valley & Elon Musk to skedaddle out to greener & nicer pastures taking all their jobs & moola with them??? Why??

and then it hit me……there is a strategythe Dems want the businesses to fail; they want the small business people to fail…they want to kill their golden goose…WHY? Democrats have always been big supporters of Eminent Domain…I could not believe it when I found out years ago it is usually the Dems behind confisicating people’s land, homes, businesses…not really repubs…they believe in their right to do that…for the “greater good”

so my theory goes Dem leaders want to suffocate the small business & real estate & workers to the point of blight & where they give up, lose their businesses & property, have their business licenses & credentials taken away from them, etc

and then Dems claim all the property & real estate, small businesses under eminent domain or some other concocted device…take what they want …demolish the rest & start selling the locations & properties to FOREIGN INVESTORS…namely CHINA, CHINA, CHINA

Does anyone doubt that CHINA (given we are speaking about Dems, throw in Iran, etc) would love to own Los Angeles & New York City?

THIS is what I believe is the method to their madness…let things get as bad as they conceivably can without being too obvious…and then one by one Foreign money will appear & buy up the fire sales…& then recreate in their own image a “New America” with Dems in charge of who gets what & at what price.

That is very plausible, very plausible. And, if it is, it won’t just be true in the United States. What about the many European countries experiencing endless lockdowns and restrictions?

The Democrats — either at state or federal level — are not helping the normal American who has worked hard to make his or her living.

McCarthy retweeted this:

As he told Maria Bartiromo of Fox News, Nancy Pelosi used this despicable strategy to hurt President Trump. Instead, it hurt millions of Americans:

Civil rights

On civil rights, McCarthy knows the history of the Republican Party, which has championed them from the 19th century:

After the 2020 election, McCarthy pointed out the diversity among the Republican winners:

Oldies but goodies from 2018 up to 2020

In 2018, McCarthy proved that a goodly number of Democrat congressmen don’t care whether illegals vote in a US election:

Nearly three weeks later — and three weeks before the mid-term election that year — Newt Gingrich lauded McCarthy for his stance on immigration: ‘Here’s a leader with a plan to genuinely control our southern border. He needs our support’.

California politics is part of this, too:

When House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., introduced the Build the Wall, Enforce the Law Act he set the stage for a vital national debate on important questions

When contrasted with the open borders bill of Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. – which every Democratic Senate incumbent has co-sponsored – the choice between the two parties is clear.

Republicans will control the border. Democrats will throw the border wide open to anyone who wants to enter.

On October 23 that year, Fox News reported that two men threw a large rock through the window of McCarthy’s office in Bakersfield, California. The men then burglarised the equipment inside:

McCarthy posted four photographs documenting the alleged episode on Instagram — three showing the individuals he identified as possible suspects, and one providing a clear view of a massive slab of rock lying on the floor amid shattered glass.

“Does anyone know these two guys?” McCarthy wrote on the social media site, next to images of two people spotted near his office.

The Bakersfield Police Department did not comment on the alleged incident when reached by Fox News and said it would have more information on Tuesday.

McCarthy, like several other congressional Republicans, has faced threats and harassment in the past several weeks. In August, protesters in Sacramento chanting “No justice, no peace” disrupted McCarthy’s event at the Public Policy Institute of California.

Ironically, on Thursday, McCarthy retweeted President Trump’s “#JobsNotMobs” slogan, underscoring the deteriorating level of civility in politics ahead of the Nov. 6 midterm elections.

After the November 6 election that year, McCarthy was approved by a vote of 159-43 to become the new House Minority Leader.

McCarthy is someone who appeals to all Republicans. Trump, however, also wanted a more controversial figure to also represent his interests — Jim Jordan from Ohio, a wrestler during his university days:

Jim Jordan did not get his appointment as Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee until March 20, 2020. That said, Doug Collins (R-Georgia) did an excellent job defending the president during his impeachment hearings.

During Sen. Chuck Schumer’s (D-NY) shutdown early in 2019, McCarthy wanted Congress in session:

During that time, he also made it clear that he supports small government:

At the end of January 2019, in an effort for tighter border legislation, McCarthy gave a speech about the many Americans who had been the victims of crime at the hands of illegals. It was so moving that he received a bipartisan standing ovation.

A few days later, he upheld the right to life in criticising Virginia’s Democrat governor Ralph Northam for his egregious racist behaviour and stance on abortion:

Sadly, Northam’s still there.

On February 19, 2019, he posited that Adam Schiff should have recused himself from investigating Trump’s notional ‘Russian collusion’ because Schiff met with Glenn Simpson, the founder of GPS Fusion, the opposition research firm behind the Democrat-funded Steele dossier at the Aspen Security Forum in July 2018.

The matter persisted through the end of March that year, but Schiff is still the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.

In April, he warned Americans of the Democrat plan to regulate the Internet. He countered that Republicans want to keep the Internet free and open.

Two months later, he pointed out that YouTube considers itself a publisher, not a platform. It should be noted that a publisher can choose what to publish, a platform — which YouTube claims to be — cannot.

Kevin McCarthy also managed to raise a lot of money for President Trump’s 2020 campaign, starting in 2019:

McCarthy had a strategy to win a House majority in 2020. Sadly, that didn’t work — and historically, it’s very difficult — BUT at least the Republicans did not lose any seats (see the first tweet in this post).

In late October 2019, McCarthy rightly criticised the secrecy that Adam Schiff engineered around the preparations for Trump’s impeachment. Republicans were not allowed to see some of the evidence.

McCarthy refused to give it legitimacy:

On December 6, 2019, McCarthy brought Pelosi’s forked tongue approach to the attention of all Americans:

In January 2020, McCarthy set an all-time annual fundraising record for the Republicans:

On February 5, 2020, McCarthy announced that Trump was ‘acquitted for life’:

He defended Attorney General Bill Barr (who is leaving his post this month) against 2,000 former DoJ — Department of Justice — employees who wanted him to resign.

In June, he saw the agenda that lies behind people who want to topple statues and destroy police stations, public housing as well as churches:

Later this past summer, he appeared in a moving campaign ad for President Trump:

In a change from four or more years ago, McCarthy stated that he did not want an endorsement from the Chamber of Commerce. That is because the Chamber of Commerce rejected Trump in 2020 and endorsed Democrats instead. Now please revisit the ex-Dem’s comment earlier in this post about what could happen to the property that businesses going bust from coronavirus leave behind. It is entirely possible that those properties could be sold to a foreign entity or to big real estate developers.

On Wednesday, November 4, the day after the election, he tweeted, ‘Americans rejected socialism and voted for freedom’, which was true at state and federal levels. Team Trump continues to contest the presidential results.

McCarthy wants the battle for truth to continue. On November 6, he told Laura Ingraham of Fox News, ‘Republicans will not be silenced’.

I have enjoyed what I have seen and heard from Rep. Kevin McCarthy of California over the past four years. I hope he continues like this, because, if he does, he would make an excellent Speaker of the House someday.

Yesterday’s post summed up the week’s coronavirus news in the UK.

It was all rather interesting, ranging from vaccine distribution in Coventry to Sky News’s Kay Burley being sent to Coventry and back to London — for a six-month suspension. Gosh. Talk about ‘being sent to Coventry’, i.e. ostracised.

More snippets from this week follow in the coronavirus crisis.

Remember medical statistics history — Prof Carl Heneghan

Prof Carl Heneghan from Oxford warns that we should not forget statistics pre-Covid. Let us cast our minds back to one year ago, 2019:

Most respiratory infections have gone down from this time last year.

COVID-19 is the only new addition with a dramatic upward spike.

An American physician speaks out

Dr Brian Lenzkes, an internist from San Diego, California, offered an interesting thread on coronavirus censorship in the medical community.

But, first, let me begin with the following madness which he rightly exposed. Influenza has disappeared? Pull the other. A San Diego County health official says so — because people are wearing masks:

Yet, there are no tests for flu.

Dr Lenzkes has excellent tweets about diet and coronavirus, among them the following thread about censorship on the subject:

Note the fifth tweet:

Meanwhile, non-COVID patients are losing their well-being

In Britain, the National Health Service has become the National Covid Service (NCS).

Many patients with other serious conditions are losing out on critical care. This lady has lost her sight because of the NCS:

WHY?

Surely, after over 70 years, the NHS, sorry, NCS, can — and should — do much better.

Helen is only one of thousands who have gone without the care they needed.

The unvaccinated deserve nothing?

The chairman of the Oxted and Limpsfield (Surrey) RAFA — Royal Air Force Association — tweeted that those without the coronavirus vaccine should be denied service. In his opinion, there is no excuse:

Wow.

Many of us recall when the RAF fought for our freedom:

A London plumbing firm could mandate the vaccine for customers

Disappointingly, some service providers plan to discriminate against the unvaccinated.

This is Charlie Mullins, who heads London’s famous plumbing firm, Pimlico Plumbers. He gave this interview from his second home in Marbella:

Meanwhile, in Canada …

On Wednesday, December 9, the deputy premier of Ontario made a statement about coronavirus vaccines.

They are not mandatory, but if you don’t get vaccinated, your life will not return to normal:

However, the vaccine does not guarantee immunity

In any case, the vaccines do not guarantee immunity. They purport only to make the coronavirus episode less severe, much like the flu vaccine. Isn’t there a preventive solution, e.g. Vitamin D supplements, natural summer sunshine, a good diet, that could prevent the virus taking hold? I think we should be told:

In the US, overall death figures are low

Yes, despite what we read in the media, in 2020, the United States has a low overall death toll compared with previous years:

This woman is indignant over the lockdown(s) which have seen many shops in the Palisades Center in West Nyack, New York close (occasional language alert):

Londoners could be entering the dreaded Tier 3

The same nihilistic restrictions are going on in England, with the threat of London entering Tier 3.

This was yesterday’s headline in the London Evening Standard:

In conclusion

This is about the size of it. ‘Submit and obey’? Not on your Nelly:

Let’s remember:

In conclusion, the aforementioned Dr Lenzkes quoted the late Rod Serling from the original Twilight Zone:

It’s interesting that some did not think the warnings were strong enough:

Rod Serling and others warned the way they were able to do — based on their knowledge at the time.

Why do we ignore history?

My final post on Joe Biden pre-election is taking longer than expected.

I plan to post it tomorrow, all being well.

The post below involves the left-wing media and recent Biden news stories.

————————————————-

Glenn Greenwald is an excellent investigative journalist.

Last week, he resigned from The Intercept, a media outlet he co-founded in 2014.

Both Greenwald and another investigative journalist, Matt Taibbi, who is a contributing editor for Rolling Stone, explain why.

Tucker Carlson interviewed Greenwald on Thursday, October 29, 2020:

Greenwald told Tucker that The Intercept was founded to avoid the usual journalistic censorship that occurs in mainstream media.

Yet, his editors told him that they could not publish an article of his about Joe and Hunter Biden’s business dealings because they doubted the veracity of the information.

Greenwald noted that, over the past few years, there has been a close alliance among US intelligence agencies, the Democrats, the media and Silicon Valley.

He pointed out that intelligence agencies were supposed to lie to foreign enemies, not the American people. Yet, they have been seen time and time again twisting the truth to Americans.

I’ll have more on Greenwald’s censored article below.

Matt Taibbi wrote a fascinating article explaining the circumstances behind Greenwald’s resignation, excerpted below, emphases mine — except where noted otherwise:

He begins with this:

Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Glenn Greenwald quit his job this morning. In a bizarre, ironic, and disturbing commentary on trends in modern media, the celebrated reporter was forced to resign after writing a story criticizing both the Biden campaign and intelligence community — only to have it spiked by the editors of The Intercept, the news outlet he co-founded six years ago with the aim of preventing pretty much this exact situation.

“The irony,” Greenwald says, “is that a media outlet I co-founded, and which was built on my name and my accomplishments, with the purpose of guaranteeing editorial independence, is now censoring me in the most egregious way — about the leading presidential candidate, a week before the election.”

It was clear from the beginning that his editor was in the tank for the Democrats and for Joe Biden:

In a nutshell, the fatal sequence of events went as follows:

Greenwald, after commenting pointedly about the reaction by press and Democratic Party officials to the New York Post story, reached out to Intercept editor Betsy Reed to float the idea of writing on the subject.

The first hint of trouble came when Reed suggested that yes, it might be a story, if proven correct, but “even if it did represent something untoward about Biden,” that would “represent a tiny fraction of the sleaze and lies Trump and his cronies are oozing in every day.”

When Greenwald retorted that deciding not to report on one politician’s scandals because those of another politician are deemed worse is a “corrupt calculus” for reporters, Reed expressed concern. Based on this, on his comments on Twitter, and other factors, she worried that “we are headed for a conflict over the editing of this piece.”

Greenwald insisted he wasn’t planning an overwhelming amount of coverage but wanted to do a single article, reviewing the available facts and perhaps asking the Biden campaign to comment on the veracity of the Post story. Reed agreed that he should write a draft, then they could “see where we are.”

‘See where we are’ does not bode well coming from an editor:

An aside: when reporters and editors interact, they speak between the lines. If an editor only ever suggests or assigns stories from a certain angle, you’re being told they don’t particularly want the other angle. If your editor has lots of hypothetical concerns at the start, he or she probably won’t be upset if you choose a different topic. Finally, when an editor lays out “suggestions” about things that might “help” a piece “be even stronger,” it’s a signal both parties understand about what elements have to be put in before the editor will send the thing through.

Reed assigned Greenwald an editor for his article — and more:

Peter Maass would edit, but Reed also noted that there was a lot of “in-house knowledge” they could all “tap into.”

By “in-house knowledge,” she meant the work of Robert Mackey and Jim Risen, two Intercept reporters with whom Greenwald clashed in the past. Risen had already loudly denounced the Post story not only as conspiracy theory, but foreign disinformation. Essentially, Reed was telling Greenwald his piece would be quasi-edited by people with whom he’d had major public disagreements about Russia-related issues going back years

“The only reason people are getting interested in and ready to scrutinize what I write is because everyone is afraid of being accused of having published something harmful to Biden,” Greenwald told them. “That’s the reality.”

Taibbi posted a screenshot of an exchange between Reed and Greenwald with that quote.

US intelligence agencies and the media have deemed what has been uncovered to date with regard to the Bidens is Russian disinformation and is unverifiable.

Peter Maass and Greenwald locked horns:

Maass suggested Greenwald cut the piece and stick to a narrower essay about whether or not the press was directly asking Biden enough questions. Another irony: Greenwald was trying to criticize the rush to describe the Post story as disinformation, and Maass was essentially asking that he address the “disinformation issue,” even though the material’s veracity had not been denied, and the editors themselves didn’t seem to believe the laptop material was fake. Reed at one point wrote to Greenwald, “I agree with you that [the emails] appear to be mostly or entirely genuine, though authentication has been difficult in part because of the Biden camp’s refusal to address questions about authenticity.”

Greenwald, by then furious, noted that neither Maass nor Reed had identified a factual inaccuracy in the article, but rather disagreed with its conclusions and his assessments of the facts — his “positions,” rather than his information.

Greenwald resigned. The Intercept reacted negatively:

The Intercept quickly put out an icy statement describing him as a “grown person throwing a tantrum,” adding that Greenwald was laboring under the assumption that “anyone who presumes to edit him is a censor.”

They piled more blame on him:

“It is Glenn who has strayed from his original journalistic roots, not the Intercept.” Mourning the reporter he “used to be,” the Intercept editors defined the value that Glenn supposedly lost sight of as “an investigative mission… that involved a collaborative process.” In other words, absolute editorial freedom — but by group consent.

They also made him out to be a Trump apologist, which he is not:

They then pulled out the go-to rhetorical device of media hall monitors in the Trump era, accusing him of being a secret Trump partisan, trying to “recycle… the Trump campaign’s… dubious claims, and launder them as journalism.”

I don’t think he supports either Trump or Biden, even though he leans left-of-centre. His main focus is truthful, investigative journalism.

Taibbi tells us how The Intercept was founded:

On February 10th, 2014, Greenwald, documentarian Laura Poitras, and fellow reporter Jeremy Scahill announced the creation of an aggressive new investigative outlet, backed by the deep pockets of eBay founder and billionaire Pierre Omidyar.

It was big news in the media world. Greenwald and Poitras had been working on one of the great scoops in recent times, helping former NSA contractor and whistleblower Edward Snowden come forward about a secret, illegal mass surveillance program conducted by the U.S. government. After bringing the story to light, Snowden was forced into exile, and Greenwald in particular became the subject of denunciations by colleagues and politicians alike, with some prominent officials openly calling for his prosecution and jailing.

The Intercept was designed specifically to be a place where journalists would be protected from such intimidation and editorial interference.

At that time, The Intercept‘s editorial policy was as follows (emphasis in the original):

The editorial independence of our journalists will be guaranteed… Our journalists will be not only permitted, but encouraged, to pursue stories without regard to whom they might alienate.

Taibbi explains:

Greenwald co-founded the Intercept with this exact scenario in mind, building a structure where “little private talks” with bosses would never happen, and there couldn’t be high-profile dismissals for ideological reasons.

What he didn’t guess at was that even in an atmosphere where managerial interference is near zero, a collective of independent journalists can themselves become censors and enforcers of official orthodoxies. In some cases, free journalists will become more aggressive propagandists and suppressors of speech than the officials from whom they supposedly need to be protected. This Lord of the Flies effect is what happened with The Intercept.

Taibbi documents how Russia, which Obama viewed as insignificant, suddenly became America’s greatest enemy again in 2016:

After 2016, however, these officials presented themselves as norms-defending heroes protecting America against the twin “existential” threats of Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. Russia, just a few years ago described by Rachel Maddow as a harmless “gnat on the butt of an elephant,” was now reinvented as an all-powerful foe mounting an influence campaign of unprecedented reach, with everyone from Trump to the Green Party to blogs like Truthdig and Naked Capitalism, to congresswoman and war veteran Tulsi Gabbard, to Bernie Sanders, all potentially doing the bidding of a Cold War foe bent on “sowing discord” on our shores.

This propagandistic effort revolved around making the Democratic Party into a collective hero:

A key part of this propaganda campaign was the continual insistence that any criticism of the Democratic Party was, in essence, aid and comfort to our Red Enemy. Would-be progressive journalists horrified by Donald Trump accepted this logic with enthusiasm. Over the course of four years they abandoned their traditional mistrust of the security state to transform themselves into a squad of little Pavik Morozovs, anxious to stamp out traitors to the cause and keep the news business clean of “Russian” misinformation that might help Donald Trump get re-elected.

Bizarre, yet, as we know, it’s true.

Greenwald noted that the Democrats became friendly with their arch-enemies among the neo-cons, people they had previously despised. Officials from the intelligence services were also invited to participate in television interviews:

As press enthusiasm for the Trump-Russia story widened, progressives began to invite old enemies back into the fold. People like “Axis of Evil” speechwriter David Frum and Weekly Standard editor and key Iraq War proponent Bill Kristol became regular guests on CNN and MSNBC, while ex-spooks like Brennan, Clapper, Hayden, and a long list of others were given TV contributor deals, now serving as the press instead of facing criticism from it.

“The prevailing power center is Silicon Valley, Wall Street, and the Democratic Party,” Greenwald says. “In the Trump era, they managed to convince everyone to view anyone who opposes Trump as allies.”

Greenwald received a lot of nasty pushback for pointing that out. His aforementioned editor Betsy Reed helped to contribute:

When the New Yorker wrote an astonishingly vicious profile of Greenwald, describing his refusal to accept theories of Russian subversion as a pathology inspired by a difficult childhood and confusion over his sexuality, his nominal boss and co-worker, Reed, was happy to chime in about things Greenwald does that are “not helpful to the left.”

Taibbi cites several more examples, all of which must have been hurtful to Greenwald personally as well as professionally.

Taibbi ends with this:

When the likes of Brennan, Clapper, and Hayden wrote a joint letter decrying the recent Post story as a seeming Russian mischief, they were very careful in what they said. They used the term “information operation” instead of “misinformation,” and prominently included the line, “We do not have evidence of Russian involvement.”

However, in the recent Intercept story quoting that letter, describing the Post story has having “the classic earmarks of Russian misinformation,” the line about not having evidence was left out.

“The CIA letter was more honest than The Intercept,” is how Greenwald puts it.

A few years ago, reporters had the intelligence community on the defensive. Now, reporters are ratting each other out on their behalf, with the aim of creating an absolute political monoculture. Having pushed out one of journalism’s most accomplished members, they’ve nearly succeeded.

Glenn Greenwald has a page on Substack, as does Taibbi.

On Thursday, October 29, he published ‘My Resignation From The Intercept’, excerpted below.

Greenwald said that The Intercept would not allow him to publish his Biden article via any publication:

The censored article, based on recently revealed emails and witness testimony, raised critical questions about Biden’s conduct. Not content to simply prevent publication of this article at the media outlet I co-founded, these Intercept editors also demanded that I refrain from exercising a separate contractual right to publish this article with any other publication

So censorship of my article, rather than engagement with it, was the path these Biden-supporting editors chose.

The censored article will be published on this page shortly (it is now published here, and the emails with Intercept editors showing the censorship are here). My letter of intent to resign, which I sent this morning to First Look Media’s President Michael Bloom, is published below.

As of now, I will be publishing my journalism here on Substack, where numerous other journalists, including my good friend, the great intrepid reporter Matt Taibbi, have come in order to practice journalism free of the increasingly repressive climate that is engulfing national mainstream media outlets across the country.

He said that leaving The Intercept was not a decision he took lightly:

Like anyone with young children, a family and numerous obligations, I do this with some trepidation, but also with the conviction that there is no other choice. I could not sleep at night knowing that I allowed any institution to censor what I want to say and believe — least of all a media outlet I co-founded with the explicit goal of ensuring this never happens to other journalists, let alone to me, let alone because I have written an article critical of a powerful Democratic politician vehemently supported by the editors in the imminent national election.

Years ago, he moved from practising law to becoming a journalist:

From the time I began writing about politics in 2005, journalistic freedom and editorial independence have been sacrosanct to me. Fifteen years ago, I created a blog on the free Blogspot software when I was still working as a lawyer: not with any hopes or plans of starting a new career as a journalist, but just as a citizen concerned about what I was seeing with the War on Terror and civil liberties, and wanting to express what I believed needed to be heard. It was a labor of love, based in an ethos of cause and conviction, dependent upon a guarantee of complete editorial freedom.

It thrived because the readership I built knew that, even when they disagreed with particular views I was expressing, I was a free and independent voice, unwedded to any faction, controlled by nobody, endeavoring to be as honest as possible about what I was seeing, and always curious about the wisdom of seeing things differently. The title I chose for that blog, “Unclaimed Territory,” reflected that spirit of liberation from captivity to any fixed political or intellectual dogma or institutional constraints.

When Salon offered me a job as a columnist in 2007, and then again when the Guardian did the same in 2012, I accepted their offers on the condition that I would have the right, except in narrowly defined situations (such as articles that could create legal liability for the news outlet), to publish my articles and columns directly to the internet without censorship, advanced editorial interference, or any other intervention permitted or approval needed. Both outlets revamped their publication system to accommodate this condition, and over the many years I worked with them, they always honored those commitments.

When I left the Guardian at the height of the Snowden reporting in 2013 in order to create a new media outlet, I did not do so, needless to say, in order to impose upon myself more constraints and restrictions on my journalistic independence. The exact opposite was true: the intended core innovation of The Intercept, above all else, was to create a new media outlets where all talented, responsible journalists would enjoy the same right of editorial freedom I had always insisted upon for myself.

He has much more on his time at The Intercept and the stories he and his fellow journalists broke.

These are his plans for the immediate future:

I hope to exploit the freedom this new platform offers not only to continue to publish the independent and hard-hitting investigative journalism and candid analysis and opinion writing that my readers have come to expect, but also to develop a podcast, and continue the YouTube program, “System Update,” I launched earlier this year in partnership with The Intercept.

To do that, to make this viable, I will need your support: people who are able to subscribe and sign up for the newsletter attached to this platform will enable my work to thrive and still be heard, perhaps even more so than before. I began my journalism career by depending on my readers’ willingness to support independent journalism which they believe is necessary to sustain. It is somewhat daunting at this point in my life, but also very exciting, to return to that model where one answers only to the public a journalist should be serving.

His article on Joe Biden is ‘Article on Joe and Hunter Biden Censored by The Intercept’. ‘The Real Scandal: U.S. Media Uses Falsehoods to Defend Joe Biden from Hunter’s Emails’ follows an introductory paragraph on his resignation.

Excerpts follow. I won’t go in to all the Biden material, as I posted enough times on it over the past several days.

It is interesting to look at the media’s reaction and the Biden campaign’s reaction in light of that:

Publication by the New York Post two weeks ago of emails from Hunter Biden’s laptop, relating to Vice President Joe Biden’s work in Ukraine, and subsequent articles from other outlets concerning the Biden family’s pursuit of business opportunities in China, provoked extraordinary efforts by a de facto union of media outlets, Silicon Valley giants and the intelligence community to suppress these stories.

One outcome is that the Biden campaign concluded, rationally, that there is no need for the front-running presidential candidate to address even the most basic and relevant questions raised by these materials. Rather than condemn Biden for ignoring these questions — the natural instinct of a healthy press when it comes to a presidential election — journalists have instead led the way in concocting excuses to justify his silence.

He discusses what information has been made public and by whom, including journalists and pundits, then states:

All of these new materials, the authenticity of which has never been disputed by Hunter Biden or the Biden campaign, raise important questions about whether the former Vice President and current front-running presidential candidate was aware of efforts by his son to peddle influence with the Vice President for profit, and also whether the Vice President ever took actions in his official capacity with the intention, at least in part, of benefitting his son’s business associates. But in the two weeks since the Post published its initial story, a union of the nation’s most powerful entities, including its news media, have taken extraordinary steps to obscure and bury these questions rather than try to provide answers to them.

He details the censorship by Facebook and Twitter:

After that initial censorship burst from Silicon Valley, whose workforce and oligarchs have donated almost entirely to the Biden campaign, it was the nation’s media outlets and former CIA and other intelligence officials who took the lead in constructing reasons why the story should be dismissed, or at least treated with scorn. As usual for the Trump era, the theme that took center stage to accomplish this goal was an unsubstantiated claim about the Kremlin responsibility for the story.

Numerous news outlets, including the Intercept, quickly cited a public letter signed by former CIA officials and other agents of the security state claiming that the documents have the “classic trademarks” of a “Russian disinformation” plot. But, as media outlets and even intelligence agencies are now slowly admitting, no evidence has ever been presented to corroborate this assertion.

As is customary for Greenwald, he details various Big Media articles and broadcasts about the story.

The media’s denunciation of this story made it easier for Team Biden to maintain silence:

The Biden campaign clearly believes it has no need to answer any of these questions by virtue of a panoply of media excuses offered on its behalf that collapse upon the most minimal scrutiny

He goes into much more detail. Anyone who wonders about the veracity of the material on Joe and Hunter Biden should definitely read his article.

Essentially:

The publicly known facts, augmented by the recent emails, texts and on-the-record accounts, suggest serious sleaze by Joe Biden’s son Hunter in trying to peddle his influence with the Vice President for profit. But they also raise real questions about whether Joe Biden knew about and even himself engaged in a form of legalized corruption. Specifically, … newly revealed information suggest Biden was using his power to benefit his son’s business Ukrainian associates, and allowing his name to be traded on while Vice President for his son and brother to pursue business opportunities in China. These are questions which a minimally healthy press would want answered, not buried — regardless of how many similar or worse scandals the Trump family has.

He concludes that the media’s ignoring this story is as bad, if not worse, than the allegations against the Bidens:

But the real scandal that has been proven is not the former Vice President’s misconduct but that of his supporters and allies in the U.S. media. As Taibbi’s headline put it: “With the Hunter Biden Exposé, Suppression is a Bigger Scandal Than the Actual Story.”

He then goes into various media narratives and top stories from the 2016 presidential campaign before concluding:

The U.S. media often laments that people have lost faith in its pronouncements, that they are increasingly viewed as untrustworthy and that many people view Fake News sites are more reliable than established news outlets. They are good at complaining about this, but very bad at asking whether any of their own conduct is responsible for it.

A media outlet that renounces its core function — pursuing answers to relevant questions about powerful people — is one that deserves to lose the public’s faith and confidence. And that is exactly what the U.S. media, with some exceptions, attempted to do with this story: they took the lead not in investigating these documents but in concocting excuses for why they should be ignored.

As my colleague Lee Fang put it on Sunday: “The partisan double standards in the media are mind boggling this year, and much of the supposedly left independent media is just as cowardly and conformist as the mainstream corporate media. Everyone is reading the room and acting out of fear.” Discussing his story from Sunday, Taibbi summed up the most important point this way: “The whole point is that the press loses its way when it cares more about who benefits from information than whether it’s true.”

Glenn Greenwald is far from alone:

Other journalists are coming forward with their stories and experiences. I look forward to covering those in due course.

On Friday, I wrote about Hunter Biden’s laptop, the October Surprise of the 2020 US presidential election.

On Saturday, October 24, the New York Post (NYP) published a good summary of Biden corruption claims over the past several years.

An excerpt from ‘Biden corruption claims all but confirmed with Hunter emails’ follows, emphases mine.

In 2018, the NYP published a book, Secret Empires.

Since the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop surfaced, the NYP article says:

This material suggests that, despite Joe Biden’s insistence that he knew nothing about his family’s business deals, he was well aware of his son Hunter Biden’s business ventures in China, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and elsewhere.

These new troves constitute hard evidence of Biden family corruption, and confirm our reporting dating back to our 2018 book “Secret Empires.”

In 2018, when we first broke the foreign influence scandals that have now engulfed the former vice president, it seemed apparent that China and Ukraine were not paying Biden’s family members for their expertise, they were buying access to the vice president of the United States. This was never a scandal solely about Hunter or Joe’s brothers, James and Frank. It was, and has always been, a Joe Biden scandal.

For nearly three years, Biden and his surrogates have responded to the scandal with an increasingly unconvincing series of denials — including another from the former Vice President in his last debate with President Trump.

In response to “Secret Empires,” one of Joe Biden’s aides said “we aren’t going to engage on a politically motivated hit pieces …” Team Biden did not bother to respond to specific allegations that the Biden family vacuumed up millions, in the exact locales where Biden was Obama’s policy “point man.”

When the issue reemerged during the campaign, Team Biden continued to call it a “conspiracy theory” but this time, Joe Biden firmly put himself on record. “I have never discussed with my son or my brother or anyone else anything having to do with their businesses — period,” he told reporters in August 2019.

“I never talk with my son or my brother or anyone else in the distant family about their business interests, period.” He repeated similar blanket denials on numerous occasions.

These denials all proved to be untruthful. Period.

Perhaps this is why Joe Biden rarely gives a press conference.

The article goes on to summarise their research into the Bidens’ business dealings, much of which I wrote about last Friday.

Twitter locked the NYP‘s account several days ago. The ban continues:

However, even less combustible content, such as Biden’s flip-flops on fracking, also faces censorship. This has to do with YouTube:

Hmm, sounds a bit like China:

Returning to the Biden corruption story, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) posted an article on October 22, ‘Now Corruption Story Is About Joe, Not Hunter’.

It discusses how Big Media, with the exception of Newsweek, are ignoring the Hunter Biden laptop story:

The recent media blackout on the Biden family business remains largely intact. The story did get a mention in a weekly newsletter from the public editor at National Public Radio. Beginning around paragraph 16, Kelly McBride addresses a listener’s question:

Carolyn Abbott writes: Someone please explain why NPR has apparently not reported on the Joe Biden, Hunter Biden story in the last week or so that Joe did know about Hunter’s business connections in Europe that Joe had previously denied.

Ms. McBride then spends a paragraph disparaging the Post and clinging to the hope that the emails are not legitimate before acknowledging:

But the biggest reason you haven’t heard much on NPR about the Post story is that the assertions don’t amount to much.

“We don’t want to waste our time on stories that are not really stories, and we don’t want to waste the listeners’ and readers’ time on stories that are just pure distractions,” NPR Managing Editor for News Terence Samuel told me. “And quite frankly, that’s where we ended up, this was … a politically driven event and we decided to treat it that way.”

The WSJ article concludes:

This column takes a back seat to no one in skepticism about the Beltway establishment. But given the documented overseas riches collected by the Biden family, it would be patently unfair to claim that the average Washingtonian is as corrupt as the former vice president.

On August 19, Town & Country explained how Joe and his educator wife Dr Jill Biden amassed their wealth. This has nothing to do with the NYP‘s reporting but only with speaking engagements and investments. How can people somehow amass so much money from politics and education? Astounding:

As recently as November 2009, Joe Biden’s net worth was less than $30,000, according to CBS, but life post-vice presidency has been quite lucrative for President Obama’s former number two. When Biden released his financial disclosures in July of 2019, they showed that he and his wife Jill had earned more than $15 million in 2017 and 2018.

More specifically, the Bidens reported an adjusted gross income of roughly $11 million in 2017 and $4.6 million in 2018. The bulk of that number comes from a multi-book deal with Flatiron Books valued at $8 million per Publishers Weekly, but the Bidens also earned a sizable income from speaking engagements.

The AP reports that Biden’s basic speaking fee was $100,000, but it ranged from $40,000 to $190,000. The New York Times also notes that Biden made additional unpaid speaking engagements during this time which are not listed on the disclosure, citing his campaign.

Additionally, the disclosures reveal that the former VP earned $540,000 as a professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement

His wife, Dr. Jill Biden also recently shared that she will continue to teach at community college, even if her husband is elected. “It’s important,” she said, “and I want people to value teachers and know their contributions, and lift up the profession.”

Steve Bannon has been digging around the contents of the emails on Hunter Biden’s laptop. On October 23, the Gateway Pundit reported (emphasis in the original):

The Steve Bannon War Room released an email from China’s Communist Party operative Xin Wang to Hunter Biden and Eric Schwerin from 2018 regarding a loan agreement. In the email Xin Wang offers to extend the loan agreement to December 13, 2019.

This raises several questions including was this agreement with the CCP presented to the IRS or SEC?
If not that would be unlawful.

The War Room says they have signatures.

Two days earlier, Bannon told Revolver News (emphasis in the original):

This shocking development demands that the President call in FBI Director Wray immediately to explain how that agency suppressed the information on Biden’s hard drive for almost a year. If Wray cannot explain himself, he should be summarily fired in front of the Resolute Desk. This is now a national security crisis driven by the craven behavior of the Bidens. A storm is gathering around Biden’s campaign and no gang of Silicon Valley social media oligarchs can shield them from their fate.

Earlier, on October 18, Bannon also gave an interview to Sky News Australia:

The YouTube description says, in part:

The emails revealed that Hunter Biden had planned to introduce his father – the then Vice President- to an executive at Ukrainian energy company Burisma, a company where Hunter served on the board of directors.

Joe Biden has lied about this for years, and it’s pretty stunning the information that has come off this hard drive. It’s really shocked the United States,” Mr Bannon said.

“Joe Biden has said, categorically, my family has nothing to do with, no financial relationship with China and the Chinese communist party.”

I think what we have here now, we’ve brought in a number of experts to look at this, we have a massive national security issue with Joe Biden and the people around him.

I don’t think Joe Biden today could get a security clearance, so I don’t know how in 16 days he’s going to stand and run for commander in chief of the United States.”

Speaking of Burisma, recently, former Secretary of State John Kerry explained to Biden campaigners how important it was to get rid of a prosecutor in Ukraine. What Kerry leaves unsaid is WHY the prosecutor had to go: he was going to investigate Burisma. Biden, then vice president, even said that Ukraine would not get US money until the prosecutor was fired. It’s all in this short video:

Joe Biden’s brother, James, also made money thanks to Joe’s position as vice president. President Trump brought this up at one of the two presidential debates. The information comes from a book that came out early this year: Profiles in Corruption: Abuse of Power by America’s Progressive Elite by Peter Schweizer, the president of the Government Accountability Institute.

James Biden was able to get a lucrative contract in Iraq, of all places, to build homes. Allegedly, James Biden knows nothing about building homes.

David Harris Jr’s site has an excellent summary of the contract: ‘Fact Check: Donald Trump Says Joe Biden’s Brother “Made Money in Iraq”‘.

The article’s author, Steven Ahle, explains (emphases mine):

During the debate, President Trump made the claaim that Biden’s brother James made millions of dollars in Iraq. Biden did not comment.

As it turns out, James was made executive vice president of HillStone International. Shortly thereafter Hillstone got a $1.5 billion dollar contract in Iraq to build 100,000 homes.

The thing is that neither James Biden or Hillstone had a lick of experience in building homes. How could a company with no experience get such a large contract with no experience. The same way that Hunter became a board member of Burisma. Joe.

I’ll give you three guesses who was in charge of humanitarian aid in Iraq. Joe Biden.

Ahle went on to excerpt Peter Schweizer’s book:

He detailed all of the conflicts of interest that made the Bidens rich. Kevin Justice, founder, and president of Hillstone International was summoned to the White House where he spoke to Michele Smith, a top aide to then-Vice President Joe Biden.

Smith was the liaison to “global government officials and business executives.”

And why did HillStone hire James Biden when there are tens of thousands of candidates with actual experience in building? My guess is because none of them had experience in being the brother of the vice president. You have to have your priorities.

Here’s the book excerpt (emphasis in the original):

Schweizer explained in January:

[James Biden] landed a very lucrative job in the construction business. Essentially what happened is, a guy named Kevin Justice — a longtime Biden family friend — in November of 2010, went and visited the white House and met with Joe Biden’s people in Joe Biden’s office. He started a company called HillStone International, a construction company. Three weeks after that meeting in the White House, he announced that James Biden, Joe Biden’s brother, was going to join as an executive vice president.

What stands out in this, of course, is that James Biden has no background in construction, and in a bio the company released on him, all they noted was the fact that he was comfortable in the corridors of power and his brother was vice president of the United States. A few months after he joins the firm, lo and behold, this new company lands a contract to build 100,000 homes in Iraq from the federal government. They get a bunch of other contracts, as well.

In closing, the American Thinker had an important article about Joe Biden’s alleged ties to China. Author Andrea Widburg took a deep dive with ‘Forget the Hunter Biden sex tapes. The real news is much bigger than that’. Excerpts follow, emphases mine:

GTV, a Chinese dissident billionaire’s Taiwan-based media outlet, is releasing sordid, depressing videos and photographs of a person purported to be Hunter Biden … The big news is that the same outlet claims that (a) Communist China owns Joe Biden; (b) Joe Biden sold out CIA assets in China who were then executed or imprisoned; and (c) GTV has millions of images showing other presumably influential people in comprising positions. If all this is true, we may see a complete realignment in Western politics …

What’s more interesting than the images themselves is the story behind them and the allegations included with them. Taiwan-based GTV and GNews, which published the material, are owned by Guo Wengui, a dissent Chinese billionaire.

Guo was born in mainland China and gained his wealth doing construction work. Eventually, he ran into trouble, and the Chinese government accused him of corruption. (The reality, of course, is that anyone who has become wealthy in China was corrupt.)

Guo escaped with his wealth to America. He is a fervent enemy of the Chinese Communist Party and has made it his mission to bring it down. One of his friends is Steve Bannon, with whose help he founded GTV and GNews. In June, Bannon joined with Guo to declare a “New Federal State of China” they hope will overthrow China’s communist government.

When the New York Post, on October 14, published its first report about Hunter Biden’s hard drive, that wasn’t the first time Hunter’s computer made the news. According to the Daily Beast, on September 25, a Guo-affiliated YouTube station uploaded a Chinese-language video announcing that Guo and Bannon had sent “sent three hard disks of evidence” to both the Justice Department and Nancy Pelosi.

Three days later, Himalaya Global, a movement that Guo and Bannon started, published a tweet making the same announcement, only adding that the disks created a “big money and sex scandal.” Twitter has since suspended the account, but the Daily Beast captured the contents …

The tweet (shown in the article) announces a ‘bombshell’ involving three hard disks from Hunter Biden’s laptop revealing his connections to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and says they were sent to Nancy Pelosi and the US Department of Justice. The tweet was dated September 28.

The NYP articles began appearing after that.

Emphases in the original below, the ones in purple mine:

As if that’s not shocking enough, Guo’s outlets have made a few other staggering allegations. These allegations are scattered throughout the videos and summarized in this essay at GNews (emphas[e]s mine):

This video shows only the tip of the iceberg of what is important in the Chinese Communist Party’s Blue-Gold-Yellow (BGY) program. They take advantage of all those Western politicians, celebrities, and their families who are greedy for Chinese wealth, and threaten them by getting hold of and recording their sex and drug videos, forcing them to sell out their countries and people, and even their own national security in order to cooperate with the Chinese Communist Party’s world domination.

U.S. presidential candidate Joe Biden is 100% controlled by the Chinese Communist Party as one of the most successful political instances of the BGY program. He is also a target of the CCP’s 3F plan, which aims to “fall, fail, and fell,” to weaken, destroy and kill America!

The Chinese Communist Party’s use of this tactic to threaten Biden and his sons and to bribe them with large amounts of wealth is one of the major causes of the disputes over the South China Sea, US-China trade, intellectual property rights, and energy prices, etc., as well as Biden’s provision of large numbers of CIA intelligence agents in China to the Chinese Communist Party.

The Chinese Communist Party has such a BGY program in the United States and in several Western countries in Europe. We will have millions of videos and photos of government officials, corrupt people, traitors, and criminals colluding with the Communist Party to dominate the world.

Again, merely because Guo’s outlets have been accurate about some things does not mean that the above allegations are true. However, the following three allegations, if true, are earth-shaking:

First: China has long owned Biden thanks to its having compromising information about his family (and possibly about him too).

Second: Biden identified CIA assets in China. The back story is that, between 2010 and 2012, China executed or imprisoned 18 to 20 assets who had bravely worked with the CIA, destroying a critical intelligence network.

Third: Guo’s outlets have “millions of videos and photos” of people who have worked with the Chinese against their own countries. If true, this implies that Guo managed to get into China’s “blackmail” database and can release that information.

I can’t believe this is actually happening in the United States — and involving a presidential candidate, no less.

The free world better hope that Biden does not win. If he does, we are doomed.

For the last week and a half, the biggest news in the US presidential election has been Hunter Biden’s laptop.

This is the October Surprise, the bombshell that breaks during a general election year in the United States.

Around April 12, 2019, Joe Biden’s son Hunter dropped off a laptop at a repair shop in Wilmington, Delaware. The owner sent him an invoice after repairing the device.

Hunter Biden never picked up the laptop. Nor did he pay the bill.

As is usual with most things dropped off for repair, the law stipulates that the shop owner can take possession of them. Delaware law says this happens after 90 days. Sometime afterwards, the owner began looking at the contents.

Larry C Johnson, who knows the owner’s father, has an excellent story on Gateway Pundit about what happened next. A summary follows.

As news emerged about Ukraine later that year, the owner was alarmed by the contents on the laptop. He contacted his father, a decorated Vietnam veteran, for advice. His father said that the FBI needed to know about the laptop.

In September, the owner travelled to New Mexico with the evidence. There, he went to the FBI. The FBI were not interested.

The owner returned home. Nothing happened for two months, then he received a visit from the FBI office in Wilmington, Delaware. The owner offered to give them the hard drive, but they did not take it. Two weeks later, they returned to serve him with a subpoena, with which he complied. He also gave them the hard drive and the laptop.

However, he had previously made a copy of the hard drive. After not having heard anything more from the FBI, he contacted the office of former New York City mayor, Rudy Giuliani, to offer a copy of the hard drive to him. Giuliani accepted the offer and shared the contents with the New York Post.

It turns out that not only is there information on Biden’s business dealings, including mentions of his father, but also some horrific videos that few people have seen because they are that shocking.

Rudy Giuliani has been giving interviews about the laptop. He and a small group of people have seen the contents.

This is from last Thursday, October 15:

He gave an interview to Steve Crowder the next day:

At the weekend, the New York Post (NYP) came out with a number of exposés about the contents of the laptop.

President Trump approved:

On Friday, October 17, the NYP reported Joe Biden’s reaction to those exposés (more here):

It wasn’t ’til 7:45 p.m. Friday at the Detroit airport that the former vice president briefly stopped for questions and CBS reporter Bo Erickson asked about the damning emails found on Hunter’s laptop, which was abandoned last April at a Mac repair shop.

“I have no response,” snapped Joe. “Another smear campaign. Right up your alley.”

A video of Joe’s remarks on Erickson’s Twitter account has been viewed 6 million times.

The left-leaning media outlets claim the story is ‘Russian disinformation’:

Russian disinformation? This is how the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, etc., run protection for the Biden campaign. They have ignored or maligned our stories, and claimed the emails were “hacked.”

Another NYP report said that Facebook and Twitter censored the paper’s article on the Bidens’ dealings in Ukraine. True, they did:

The Post obtained a 2015 email indicating that Vadym Pozharskyi, an adviser to the Ukrainian energy company Burisma, thanked Hunter Biden for “giving an opportunity” to meet his father, who was then serving as vice president under Barack Obama.

The elder Biden has previously said he has “never spoken to my son about his overseas business dealings.”

The controversy further escalated after Facebook and Twitter began cracking down on the spreading of the article on social media.

“While I will intentionally not link to the New York Post, I want be clear that this story is eligible to be fact checked by Facebook’s third-party fact checking partners,” Facebook spokesman Andy Stone tweeted Wednesday. “In the meantime, we are reducing its distribution on our platform.”

Twitter claimed in a statement that it had taken action against the article in keeping with the company’s “Hacked Materials Policy” and prevented users from sharing the report. The company rolled back its overzealous crackdown amid backlash, which included a mea culpa from Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey.

The Gateway Pundit reminded readers of their 2019 report about a press conference that a Ukranian parliamentarian held regarding a second laptop with information connected to the Bidens (emphasis in the original):

Ukrainian Pariamentarian Andriy Derkach (pictured) held a much publicized press conference last October in Ukraine.

In his press conference Derkach revealed that Joe Biden was paid $900,000 for lobbying efforts from Burisma Holdings in Ukraine.

Derkach even brought charts and images as proof during his presentation.

This is the same organization that paid Hunter Biden over $50,000 a month to sit on their board in an obvious pay-for-play maneuver.

Cristina Laila reported on this development back in October last year…

Fox News came out with news about Biden’s ties to China, also censored on social media:

Then there was the Daily Mail story on Hunter Biden’s alleged connections with Kazakhstan. Their reporter, Guy Adams, wrote (emphases mine):

in 2014, when Joe, as Vice President, was helping to implement U.S. policy in Ukraine, Hunter took a highly-paid job with a Ukranian energy company called Burisma (of which more later).

Around the same time, he built murky and contentious connections with Russia, helping his investment advisory firm Rosemont Seneca receive some $3.5m from the billionaire widow of former Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhov (best known on these shores for once donating £138,000 to Sadiq Khan’s Mayor’s Fund for London).

Then there was a somewhat dubious episode in China, where Hunter arranged for an entrepreneur called Jonathan Li, with whom he was setting up an investment fund, to hold a meeting (and enjoy a very public handshake) with Joe in a Beijing hotel lobby during an official visit.

Such ventures, in regions of the world hardly known for their probity, have always smelled distinctly whiffy. So what, then, ought we to make of the revelation that, when his father was Vice President, Biden Jr was doing business in a fourth cash-soaked but highly corrupt country?

Namely: Kazakhstan.

The Mail can reveal that between 2012 and 2014, Hunter worked as a sort of go-between for Kenes Rakishev, a self-styled ‘international businessman, investor and entrepreneur’ with close family connections to the kleptocratic regime of his homeland’s despotic former president Nursultan Nazarbayev.

(Nazarbayev is a name readers may be familiar with: he’s the dictator famed for taking Prince Andrew on occasional goose hunts.)

Emails passed to this newspaper via anti-corruption campaigners from the Central Asian country reveal that Biden Jr held extensive meetings with Rakishev, who was looking to invest a portion of his personal fortune in New York and Washington DC. He also travelled to the Kazakh capital of Astana to hold business discussions.

Hunter Biden then attempted to persuade Rakishev to buy into a Nevadan mining company, brokering a series of meetings with the firm, before convincing him to invest a cool million dollars with Alexandra Forbes Kerry, the film-maker daughter of Democrat Senator and former Presidential candidate John Kerry.

Rakishev, who wrote messages in broken English, appears to have become intimate with the Vice President’s son, calling Hunter ‘my brother!’ and ‘my brother from another mother!’.

They shared gossip about their family holidays and dined together at luxury restaurants in New York and Washington DC (‘I’m on vacation with family [at] Lake Michigan . . . trying to spend some much needed time with my wife and daughters. It’s my 20th anniversary of marriage tomorrow,’ Hunter told Rakishev in July 2013).

It may even be that Joe Biden himself was dragged into the oligarch’s orbit. An unverified photograph, published on the website of an anti-corruption group called the Kazakhstani Initiative on Asset Recovery, appears to show Hunter introducing his Dad to both Rakishev and one Karim Massimov, the former Kazakh Prime Minister.

So who exactly is Rakishev? …

Rakishev, for his part, is married to the daughter of a former mayor of the country’s capital city (recently re-named ‘Nursultan,’ after the elderly despot), who later served as its Defence Minister and Deputy Prime Minister. All in all it was an intriguing nexus.

Fast forward to 2012 and Rakishev had just joined Forbes magazine’s top-15 list of Kazakhstan’s ‘most influential’ tycoons, with estimated assets of some $332 million. Like many an oligarch in possession of a huge fortune, Rakishev was now looking for a safe place to park it, so had come to America in search of new places to invest his hard-earned roubles.

Sadly, things hadn’t gone entirely smoothly. For in the highly-regulated world of Western capitalism, Rakishev discovered that blue-chip investment partners were often reluctant to take his cash.

To blame? The fact that no one was entirely sure where his wealth actually came from

The United States Department of Justice then took an interest in Rakishev. It soon dragged him into an investigation of potential breaches the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act related to ‘an investment in the oil and gas industry in Kazakhstan’.

Though Rakishev immediately denied all wrongdoing, and no charges were ever filed, in September 2013 he decided to hire a notoriously expensive U.S. law firm called Greenberg Traurig to deal with incoming fire related to the probe

It was, doubtless, a very annoying (and expensive) business; not to mention highly frustrating for a man who had perhaps grown used to getting his own way. Which is perhaps what persuaded him to take meetings with Hunter Biden, a member of one of America’s most powerful political dynasties.

In May 2012, he was emailed by Hunter’s business partner Devon Archer, a lawyer and former Abercrombie & Fitch model. ‘Can you have dinner with me, Hunter Biden, Alex [Forbes Kerry] and team on Wednesday next week in NYC? I want to let Hunter know when he should come up from DC to see you on Wednesday. Looking forward to seeing you!’

Rakishev replied: ‘Hi Devon! I would be happy to have a dinner with you and all our friends! Thank you very much for invitations! Take care my brother!’

By July, Hunter had travelled to Astana to discuss business opportunities. ‘I wanted to check in with you and see what our next steps are to follow up on our visit to Kazakhstan,’ he wrote in an email to Rakishev sent shortly afterwards. ‘Let me know if you need anything from me.’

Three months later, Biden was helping Rakishev hold discussions about investing in Prospect Global Resources, a potash mining firm based in eastern Arizona.

Although the emails the Mail has seen show that the talks eventually broke down, he remained on friendly terms: ‘I wanted to reach back out to you and continue our conversations,’ Hunter wrote to Kulibayev on November 25, 2012. ‘I understand you and Timur evaluated PGRX but it was not a good fit at this time. Thank you for taking a look at it and for the quick feedback as well. Let me know when you’d like to connect.’

The duo remained in close contact throughout the following year, discussing a range of business ventures.

Then, in late October 2013, Biden’s partner Archer arranged a conference call between Rakishev and the aforementioned Alex Forbes Kerry, who was by then attempting to raise cash to launch a film production firm.

Immediately after the call that December, Rakishev emailed with happy news: ‘Thank you my brother from another mother! Thanks you very much my brother! We decided to invest 1 mln [million]! Give them my email!’

Ms Forbes Kerry, who has never publicly acknowledged her debt to Rakishev, finalised the deal in January 2014. The following month, she and Biden met Rakishev for dinner in Washington DC.

‘It was a pleasure to meet you with Devon and Hunter the other day,’ she told him by email afterwards. ‘I want to thank you for the beautiful watch! I am sorry I didn’t open it at the table. I misunderstood and thought it was a baby present so I only opened it when I was at home. It is absolutely beautiful and you are so generous . . . Please come to New York soon and bring your family. We will host you and your team.’

Rakishev responded that he intended to take up that offer in September. ‘Let’s be in touch!’ he wrote.

Sadly, at the time of this happy exchange, Biden’s marriage was in the process of breaking down

After that, Ukraine seemed to be Biden’s main focus.

SkyNews Australia has taken a deep dive into the Biden laptop story.

RealClearPolitics has looked into Hunter’s career path and Joe Biden’s influence in his getting jobs.

Now people are going back into newspaper archives to see what has been written about the two. Joe was a US Senator for Delaware for many years before he became Obama’s vice president. MBNA is located in Delaware. Joe helped Hunter get his first job out of university in the late 1990s at MBNA. It paid a six-figure salary. This is what happened a few years later:

Americans have been wondering why the FBI did not act sooner over Joe Biden’s dealings when he was vice president and now, during his candidacy for the White House.

As the Bidens are Catholics, it is not surprising that Church Militant is writing about this story:

Christine Miles published the article in Church Militant on October 20. Excerpts follow, emphases mine.

A Chinese whistleblower is working with Rudy Giuliani’s group on this:

DingGang Wang, a member of Miles Guo’s team, which has worked with Steve Bannon and Rudy Giuliani for many months, said in a Sept. 24 broadcast for Lude Media — two weeks before the New York Post bombshell — that he has reviewed the contents of a laptop owned by Hunter Biden.

This is what he said in September:

He explained:

“Who filmed these?” he asked. “The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) did it!”

Wang indicates there is much more compromising material on the laptop, and that the CCP is using the child porn videos as blackmail against Joe Biden, whom they hope is elected president.

“The message of the CCP is: Don’t ever think I don’t have your secrets in possession,” Wang explained. “To give you this hard drive is to let you know that, don’t forget, we have evidence of your crimes. You have to win this election.”

Sexual blackmail is a classic tactic of the communists, and was routinely used by the KGBIn addition to the famed “honeytrap,” wherein female KGB agents seduced American men and caught their misdeeds on tape, there is evidence General Secretary Yuri Andropov created pedophile rings in order to blackmail businessmen and political leaders.

The tactic is also used in communist China.

The article goes on to say:

The New York Post confirmed porn was found on Hunter’s laptop: “A computer camera roll of nearly 25,000 images is loaded with sexually explicit selfies and porn (which The Post is not publishing) … .”

Hunter Biden’s attorney has acknowledged the laptop belongs to his client in an email requesting that it be returned to his client.

One of Hunter’s former business partners, Bevan Cooney, independently verified the authenticity of the emails, a number of which included him.

The New York Post spent a week independently verifying and authenticating the laptop’s ownership.

Tucker Carlson of Fox News also confirmed that his own team independently authenticated the contents of the laptop.

“This afternoon we received nonpublic information that proves, conclusively, this was indeed Hunter Biden’s laptop, period,” Carlson said during a broadcast last week. “The materials on the hard drive of that computer that no one but Hunter Biden could’ve known about or have replicated. This is not a Russian hoax.”

“We are saying this definitively. We are not speculating,” he added. “The laptop in question is real. It belonged to Hunter Biden.”

The Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe, has confirmed that this is not a Russian hoax:

The Secret Service have been involved in matching dates and locations to their own logs:

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) says his staff have independently authenticated the emails.

Rudy Giuliani has turned over evidence to the Delaware State Police:

Giuliani also discusses the Bidens’ shady dealings in the second half of the following video:

Revolver has a summary of the interview, with information about the photos and a bit about what Giuliani told NewsMax:

there is no indication that Joe reported Hunter to the police. Delaware state law requires all persons with knowledge of child abuse to report it to the police, although the state Supreme Court has suggested that mandatory reporting only applies to teachers, doctors, and similar professionals.

Joe Biden’s inaction after such a horrifying admission from his own son would be appalling, but not surprising. Joe Biden has been an enabler for his entire 47 years in politics. Joe Biden enabled Hunter’s drug use and inappropriate behavior — just like he enabled NAFTA, just like he enabled the rise of China, and just like he enabled the credit-card association MBNA in his home state of Delaware. Biden has been an indulgent father toward his son, not only with respect to his drug use, but more importantly with his corrupt arrangements with foreign oligarchs.

In the interview, Giuliani suggested that Joe’s behavior towards his son might go beyond enabling to abuse. “Joe Biden used his son for twenty years as a Bag Man and he knew he was a drug addict,” Rudy told NewsMax host Greg Kelly. He continued, “This kid has a crack problem because his father put him in situations he shouldn’t be in.”

Giuliani tweeted:

Meanwhile, the aforementioned former business associate of Hunter Biden’s, Bevan Cooney, has been in an Oregon federal prison for over a year. Recently, Cooney provided two Breitbart journalists with access to his personal emails, a number of which concern his business dealings. On Tuesday, October 20, Cooney was moved to another detention facility:

On Tuesday, several days after emails Cooney provided to Breitbart News senior contributor Peter Schweizer and journalist Matthew Tyrmand became public, federal agents moved him from his cell to protect him. Tyrmand, who is in contact with members of Cooney’s family, told Breitbart News that Cooney was moved from his cell in a federal prison in Oregon around 11:00 a.m. local time on Tuesday. Tyrmand said that Cooney spoke with family members multiple times on Tuesday, which he said is “much more than usual” …

Cooney provided Schweizer and Tyrmand with written authorization to access his Gmail account, and to publish all newsworthy information from his trove of 26,000 emails. Some of them are personal and unrelated to the Biden corruption, but many of them—including ones already published last week and this week on Breitbart News and elsewhere—demonstrate a culture of corruption surrounding the Biden family.

The first story published on Breitbart News last week, by Schweizer and author Seamus Bruner, detailed how Hunter Biden and his associates secured high-level White House meetings for Chinese Communist Party-connected elites visiting Washington from China. That included, per those Chinese elites, a secret unreported meeting with then-Vice President Joe Biden himself. Other emails that surfaced on One News Network showed a deeper relationship between the Bidens and the ex-wife of the former Moscow mayor Elena Baturina. More emails surfaced Monday in another Breitbart News report showing how Hunter Biden’s business associate viewed his relationship with his father, Joe Biden—a “direct administration pipeline”—as a form of “currency” to trade on and make more money. More stories are in the works.

Vice President Mike Pence says that now is the time for Joe Biden to start answering questions about the emails, although the candidate did not make any public appearances until Thursday in the second and final presidential debate:

While Americans would like to get answers — before the election — President Trump is putting the heat on Attorney General William Barr to investigate this matter:

I have not watched this video, but Rudy Giuliani explains what the Bidens have been doing for the past 30 years.

While many Americans have been taking advantage of early voting, many others have not yet voted.

It would be nice if the media could do a decent job, but they do not. Therefore, information is hard to come by.

The media prefer emotional appeals, rather than facts, when discussing presidential candidates.

Maria Shriver is the niece of the late John F and Bobby Kennedy as well as the former Mrs Arnold Schwarzenegger. This is what she has to say on Joe Biden:

Another soft touch came from Gamespot, describing the virtual Biden campaign in a video game called Animal Crossing: New Horizons:

The Joe Biden campaign put some serious work into its island in Animal Crossing: New Horizons. The Democratic presidential nominee can be seen walking around his field office, a polling place, and much more in the meticulously designed ‘Biden HQ.’ He’ll shout one of his campaign slogans, “no malarkey” if you speak to his character. And that’s a fact, Jack …

The island has Joe Biden yard signs, a field office with a basement full of trains (one of Joe Biden’s nicknames is ‘Amtrak Joe’ since he often commuted by train), a polling place with voter information, and an ice cream stand in front of Nook’s Cranny. There are a lot of fun spaces on the island, including Joe Biden fliers (made with custom designs) on the ground in places.

The lack of left-leaning media coverage has had the desired effect: a minor dip of two percentage points in Biden’s popularity.

The reality about Joe Biden is much different.

Tony Bobulinski, a US Navy veteran and former business associate of Hunter Biden’s, gave a press conference before the US presidential debate on Thursday, October 22. He was a special guest of President Trump and spent his own money to get to the debate, held in Nashville:

Bobulinski did not take questions from the press, as he said that he would be meeting separately with members of the US Senate and the FBI today (Friday).

As evidence, he showed reporters three mobile phones which only he has handled. He read out a statement with dates and events of his involvement with Hunter. The Epoch Times (paywall) has a short summary:

… two hours before the debate, Mr. Bobulinski himself, a Navy veteran and a Democrat, gave a surprise press conference and made a statement that was like rolling a hand grenade into the debate. He made it clear—specifying date and location—that he personally had been in a meeting with Joe and Hunter Biden to discuss their business dealings with the Chinese—in effect that Joe Biden had lied to America.

He had more, implying the Biden were indeed a crime family with international connections that could endanger our national security.

More on the Bidens next week.

What follows are three stories the media won’t have covered over the past week.

Call to prayer in the US — Revd Franklin Graham

Billy Graham’s son, the Revd Franklin Graham has called for a national day of prayer and fasting in the US on Sunday, October 25:

This follows his Washington Prayer March, which took place on September 26.

May the Lord hear those who call on Him and guide the United States safely in the months ahead.

Censorship — new Project Veritas video

We know that Google and other social media outlets use algorithms to promote or suppress certain topics.

James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas released another whistleblower film about Google. I’m posting the tweets, because YouTube might take down the video, which they have done before.

Ritesh Lakhar has worked for large corporations in the US. He has been a Google employee for several years and is Technical Program Manager.

He tells his story to Project Veritas:

Sounds like election interference to me.

Project Veritas posted an accompanying article which has much of the dialogue of the video along with two additional insights from Ritesh Lakhar.

First, here’s what happened on November 9, 2016. I like the way he says ‘When Trump won the first time’, implying he will win again:

“When Trump won the first time, people were crying in the corridors of Google. There were protests, there were marches. I guess, group therapy sessions for employees–organized by HR,” he said.

“There were days, like: ‘Okay, don’t come to work. We understand this is like a shocking event. Take some time off and cool off and we’ll regather again to figure out our strategy,’” he said. “That kind of stuff–I’m like–are you serious, are you kidding me?”

The second is the contrast between Google and his previous employers — manufacturers (emphasis mine):

Lakhkar said he worked for other major industrial and medical companies, and none of them had the leftist culture he deals with at Google.

“When I worked for Caterpillar or Corning, politics didn’t really matter,” he said. “You just do your job and: ‘Let’s make tractors, let’s make glass.’”

Coronavirus — doctors speak out

I have written about the German physician, Dr Heiko Schöning, before; he was arrested in London at an anti-lockdown rally in September and held without charge for 22 hours.

He and several other doctors and life scientists have formed a group called The World Doctors Alliance. They are speaking out against the way the coronavirus crisis has been handled internationally.

YouTube have removed their video, but two clips follow.

This clip is from the beginning, where some of the members, led by Dr Schöning, introduce themselves:

In the second clip, two members of the group speak:

A Dutch GP, Dr Elke De Klerk appears first. She says that there is no COVID-19 pandemic and says that it is a ‘normal flu virus’. As such, she says they plan to sue The Netherlands. She says there is a ‘really large group’ of doctors and nurses who agree. She added that they have contact with ‘87,000 nurses that do not want the vaccine’. She said that the rights of people under the Dutch constitution cannot be violated for any medical reason. She said that the ‘false positive’ PCR tests are creating ‘panic’. She said she was ‘very happy’ that Dutch media outlets are now questioning these tests.

Professor Dolores Cahill spoke next to say that, in Ireland, there have been only 100 actual deaths of, rather than with, coronavirus.

This is what she said in Ireland in September:

I haven’t formed an opinion about this group, as I don’t know too much.

At least they present an alternative perspective at a time when, increasingly, strategies and statistics just do not make sense.

© Churchmouse and Churchmouse Campanologist, 2009-2021. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Churchmouse and Churchmouse Campanologist with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? If you wish to borrow, 1) please use the link from the post, 2) give credit to Churchmouse and Churchmouse Campanologist, 3) copy only selected paragraphs from the post — not all of it.
PLAGIARISERS will be named and shamed.
First case: June 2-3, 2011 — resolved

Creative Commons License
Churchmouse Campanologist by Churchmouse is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 UK: England & Wales License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at https://churchmousec.wordpress.com/.

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,525 other followers

Archive

Calendar of posts

June 2021
S M T W T F S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930  

http://martinscriblerus.com/

Bloglisting.net - The internets fastest growing blog directory
Powered by WebRing.
This site is a member of WebRing.
To browse visit Here.

Blog Stats

  • 1,651,657 hits