Category: Enemies Foreign

Energy Sec Granholm secretly consulted top CCP energy official before SPR releases

EXCLUSIVE: Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm engaged in multiple conversations with the Chinese government’s top energy official days before the Biden administration announced it would tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) to combat high gas prices in 2021.

Granholm’s previously-undisclosed talks with China National Energy Administration Chairman Zhang Jianhua — revealed in internal Energy Department calendars obtained by Americans for Public Trust (APT) and shared with Fox News Digital — reveal that the Biden administration likely discussed its plans to release oil from the SPR with China before its public announcement.

According to the calendars, Granholm spoke in one-on-one conversations with Jianhua, who is a longstanding senior member of the Chinese Communist Party, on Nov. 19, 2021, and two days later on Nov. 21, 2021. Then, on Nov. 23, 2021, the White House announced a release of 50 million barrels of oil from the SPR, the largest release of its kind in U.S. history at the time.

“Secretary Granholm’s multiple closed-door meetings with a CCP-connected energy official raise serious questions about the level of Chinese influence on the Biden administration’s energy agenda,” APT Executive Director Caitlin Sutherland told Fox News Digital.

“Instead of focusing on creating real energy independence for America, Granholm has been too busy parroting Chinese energy propaganda and insisting ‘we can all learn from what China is doing,’” Sutherland continued. “The public deserves to know the extent to which Chinese officials are attempting to infiltrate U.S. energy policy and security.”

In a statement, the DOE said the meeting was broadly part of the agency’s effort to combat climate change, but didn’t share what was discussed at the meeting.

Continue reading “”

Fresno Lab: China’s Operation to Exterminate Americans

An “unlicensed laboratory” in Reedley, California run by Prestige BioTech, a Nevada company fronting for parties in China, was raided in March. On site were at least 20 potentially infectious pathogens including those causing coronavirus, HIV, hepatitis, and herpes. The seizures at the lab strongly suggest China’s regime is preparing to spread diseases in America. Pictured: A laboratory at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China — widely believed to be the source of the Covid-19 pandemic. (Photo by Johannes Eisele/AFP via Getty Images) 

Prestige BioTech, a Nevada company fronting for parties in China, was caught operating an “unlicensed laboratory” in Reedley, California in March. State and Fresno County officers raided the facility, and the FBI and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have since been participating in the investigation.

The illegal operation housed white lab mice—773 live and more than 175 dead—that were genetically engineered to carry disease. Authorities also found medical waste and chemical, viral, and biological agents. There were on site at least 20 potentially infectious pathogens including those causing coronavirus, HIV, hepatitis, and herpes.

The lab is “mysterious,” as the California Globe news site proclaimed. We know enough, however, to be alarmed.

The lab was supposed to be producing COVID-19 and pregnancy tests, but the facility contained items inconsistent with that explanation. The seizures at the lab strongly suggest China’s regime is preparing to spread diseases in America, undoubtedly in the months before a war.

“This kamikaze lab—unsecured, poorly contained, makeshift, containing a couple dozen pathogens near a population center—cannot be a one-off,” Brandon Weichert, author of Biohacked: China’s Race to Control Life, told Gatestone. “It is, I believe, a part of a large Chinese military operation to spread disease throughout the American population.”

Continue reading “”

Meet the Company Trying to Control Your Mind

There’s a group of people who control what you are allowed to see — the news you read, the videos you watch, the posts you engage with.

You haven’t heard of them. You don’t know their names, but they determine, through methods both direct and indirect, whether you are allowed to be exposed to particular messages. Their decisions can bankrupt companies, silence voices and fundamentally shift cultural norms. Who are these people and how do they do this?

Well, at the top level you have a network of global elites who have created a universal framework full of guidelines and ratings designed to enforce “approved” narratives and punish disapproved ones. It sounds like a conspiracy theory, except it isn’t a secret and we’re not guessing.

First, you have the World Economic Forum, the WEF, and their platform for shaping the future of media, entertainment and culture. Second, you have the World Federation of Advertisers, the WFA, who represent mega-corporations that control 90% of global advertising dollars. WFA members are a who’s who of global business and include some of our recent wokeified favorites like Bud Light’s parent company Anheuser-Busch InBev, Hershey, Procter & Gamble, Lego and Disney.

There is barely a billionaire Fortune 500 CEO, heavyweight philanthropist, government or woke nonprofit that isn’t associated with the WEF or the WFA.

In 2019, the WFA established the Global Alliance for Responsible Media, or GARM. Within months, the WEF adopted GARM as part of its platform for shaping the future of media, entertainment and culture. GARM is a cross-industry alliance that brings these mega-corporations — the advertisers — together with Big Tech companies like Meta, who owns Facebook and Instagram; Google-owned YouTube; the CCP’s TikTok; and even Snapchat and Pinterest.

This unholy alliance created something they call the Brand Safety Floor & Suitability Framework. Think of Brand Safety as a dog whistle for censorship. They say it themselves: The Brand Safety Floor means, “Content not appropriate for any advertising support.” In other words, if you publish content that violates these guidelines, you will be blacklisted from 90% of the advertising revenue in the marketplace.

So, what have these global elites decided to put in their censorship framework? They started with things we can all universally agree on, like preventing the distribution of child pornography or the advocacy of graphic terrorist activity. But they don’t draw the line at what is objectively criminal, abusive or dangerous. They continue expanding the guidelines to include far more subjective parameters.

Continue reading “”

Our society’s ‘top brains’ have gone mad — and dysfunctional politics is the result

“Suppose we got it all wrong and the real crazies are the TV people in nice suits and $300 haircuts?”
That’s an observation by Richard Fernandez on Twitter, and he has a good point.

There’s a lot of craziness in the air these days.
But for the most part it seems to be flowing from the top down, not bubbling up from the bottom.

It wasn’t farmers and factory workers who came up with the idiotic COVID responses — nor was it they who originated the more or less criminal idea of conducting “gain of function” research on making dangerous viruses more dangerous.

It wasn’t shopkeepers and bus drivers who thought the way to deal with burgeoning urban crime was to get rid of police and release criminals without bail.

It hasn’t been landscapers and auto mechanics championing the notion that a child in the single-digit age range can make a lifetime choice about his or her genitalia or maintaining that even criticizing that idea is itself a species of “violence.”

Ordinary Americans haven’t been claiming the way to promote free speech is to censor people or the way to end racism is to classify everyone by race and consequently treat them differently.

It’s not the working class that wants to “save the planet” by blocking traffic, starting forest fires or banning pickup trucks or gas stoves (though private jets remain surprisingly free from criticism).

All these crazy ideas and more are the product of our allegedly educated and intelligent overclass, the experts, policymakers and media types who in theory represent the thinking part, the brains, of our society. But there’s something wrong with these people — the “brains” of our society are basically crazy. Crazy is when you believe and do things that obviously don’t make sense or fit with the facts.

It’s important to have an intellectual class.
Exactly how important is open to question — in his recent book “How Innovation Works,” Matt Ridley argues that most 19th- and 20th-century innovations actually came from tradespeople and industry, not academics doing abstract research — but important enough.
The COVID lockdown scolds killed people — but they still have no shame

There are dangers to an intelligentsia, though.
Communism and Nazism started as intellectual movements; so did such fads as eugenics and lobotomies.
The Tuskegee Experiment wasn’t the product of racist Klansmen but of the curiosity of credentialed public-health experts.

In a 1999 essay, Neal Stephenson wrote that “during this century, intellectualism failed, and everyone knows it. In places like Russia and Germany, the common people agreed to loosen their grip on traditional folkways, mores, and religion, and let the intellectuals run with the ball, and they screwed everything up and turned the century into an abattoir. Those wordy intellectuals used to be merely tedious; now they seem kind of dangerous as well.”

It’s gotten worse.

Ideas can be dangerous; playing with them can be like gain-of-function research with viruses — if they escape into the general environment, disaster can ensue.

Guardrails like custom, religion and moral traditions made such disasters less likely, but we have spent basically my entire lifetime weakening those guardrails.
At the same time, our ruling class has become less diverse and more prone to groupthink.

A century ago, the people running our government, our economy, our academy and our media were varied.
Now they’re all members of the same class, educated usually at the same elite institutions, incestuously intermarried and driven by class solidarity.

As J.D. Tuccille recently wrote regarding the press’ supine attitude toward government censorship, today’s journalists “love Big Brother”: “Prominent reporters and powerful officials know each other, share attitudes, and trust each other.”

Agriculturalists know that in a monoculture, diseases spread rapidly because the entire crop is identical.
In a social and intellectual monoculture, groupthink ensures that bad ideas spread the same way.
This is especially so because our ruling class has substituted reputation for achievement.

One can be a successful CEO if the company does badly, so long as it pursues the right political goals.
Journalists, bureaucrats and political operatives routinely fail upward because they play to their peers.
The result is that any crazy idea can flourish if it’s stylish. And it’s gotten more dangerous, probably because social media allow so much self-herding behavior by elites.

Dissent is instantly ostracized before it even has a chance to be considered.

A decade ago, the crazy ideas I listed earlier would have been seen as beyond the pale of civilized political discussion. Now they’re all endorsed by leading American institutions.
That’s the hallmark of dysfunctional politics, and dysfunctional politics is what we have.

Mexico’s Gun Manufacturer Argument Probed by First Circuit

The First Circuit appeared open to Mexico’s argument Monday that gunmakers knowingly manufacture and sell weapons that can be easily modified south of the border by criminal cartels for automatic fire, but were skeptical manufacturers could be held liable.

Mexico alleges that firearm giants, including Smith & Wesson Brands Inc. and Glock Inc., unlawfully design their weapons to attract cartels, exacerbating gun violence in the country. Its novel lawsuit argues that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which protects gunmakers from an array of lawsuits, shouldn’t apply for claims rooted in foreign law.

If the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit sides with Mexico, it could open the door to more litigation from other countries against American gunmakers.

However, judges were skeptical that gunmakers should be held liable for weapons that were later modified abroad. Rather than focusing on Mexico’s broader argument about the legal shield, the judges bored in on the question of whether an exception for knowing violations of state or federal laws is applicable here.

That exception would give Mexico an avenue to pursue its claims even if the court finds federal immunity law applies.

“If you violate federal gun laws you do not get protected” by the liability shield, said Jonathan Lowy, president of Global Action on Gun Violence, who represents Mexico.

Judge William Kayatta asked Lowy, “what then is the cause of action that would involve the manufacturer knowingly violating” the law. Lowy responded that the cause of action is the manufacturers allegedly aiding and abetting unlicensed weapons, as well as allegedly designing semi-automatic weapons that can be easily modified to shoot automatically.

“If it was not originally designed as a machine gun, it’s not a machine gun,” said Noel Francisco, a partner at Jones Day representing the manufacturers. Francisco served as US Solicitor General in the Trump administration.

Embracing Mexico’s view of convertible semi-automatic weapons would make the federal government “derelict in its duty” to regulate machine guns in the US, Francisco said.

The manufacturers argue that Mexico hasn’t adequately alleged any violation of federal or state law, and that the “chain of causation” from the manufactures to the injury Mexico seeks relief for is too long to show proximate cause, since the guns are ultimately distributed by retailers that are not named defendants in the lawsuit.

Kayatta suggested that Mexico’s complaint did allege violations of US law.

Judge Gustavo Gelpí also asked both sides whether the lawsuit implicated the Second Amendment.

“You’re talking about a lawsuit that has potentially crippling effects on the ability of an individual firearms owner to obtain firearms,” Francisco answered, arguing that a win for Mexico could allow other countries to govern US firearm policy.

“I don’t think any court has held that there is some Second Amendment right to negligently or illegally hold and make guns,” Lowy said.

You Will Own Nothing: Your War with a New Financial World Order and How to Fight Back

When Carol Roth first heard that one of the World Economic Forum’s predictions for 2030 was “You will own nothing, and be happy,” she thought it was an outlandish fantasy. Then, she researched it. What she found was that a number of businesses, governments, and global elites share a vision of a future that sounds utopian: Everyone will have everything they need, and no one will own anything.

From declines in home and vehicle ownership to global inflation and government spending, many of the trends of modern life reveal that a new world that is emerging—one in which Western citizens, by choice or by circumstance, increasingly do not own possessions or accumulate wealth. It’s the perfect economic environment for the rich and powerful to solidify their positions and prevent anyone else from getting ahead.

In You Will Own Nothing¸ Roth reveals how the agendas of Wall Street, world governments, international organizations, socialist activists, and multinational corporations like Blackrock all work together to reduce the power of the dollar and prevent millions of Americans from taking control of their wealth. She shows why owning fewer assets makes you poorer and less free. This book is essential guide to protecting your hard-earned wealth for the coming generations.

United Nations’ Power Grab: Threatening National Sovereignty and Individual Freedom

Holy threat to national sovereignty, Batman! The United Nations appears to believe that it should be in charge of global responses to various emergencies that impact multiple countries – and, if the reports are correct, our very own President Joe Biden agrees.

The U.N. is gearing up to position itself as the decider of how the international community responds to various calamities that might occur. This means it could even have the power to override America’s national sovereignty and dictate how our government functions in these moments.

This has been a long time coming. It appears that our own government might be willing to sign on to such an agreement. The United Nations is planning to adopt a Pact for the Future during its “Summit of the Future” in September 2024, which includes a proposal for a new “emergency platform.”

This platform would grant the UN significant powers to respond to global shocks like pandemics, and the UN would have authority over public and private sectors worldwide. The Biden administration has expressed support for this proposal, potentially giving the UN unprecedented control and endangering American sovereignty:

In September 2024, less than two months before the next U.S. presidential election, the United Nations will host a landmark “Summit of the Future,” where member nations will adopt a Pact for the Future. The agreement will solidify numerous policy reforms offered by the U.N. over the past two years as part of its sweeping Our Common Agenda platform.

Although there are numerous radical proposals included in the agenda, perhaps none are more important than the U.N. plan for a new “emergency platform,” a stunning proposal to give the U.N. significant powers in the event of future “global shocks,” such as another worldwide pandemic.

According to a message from United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres, these “global shocks” would require the Emergency Platform to “actively promote and drive an international response that places the principles of equity and solidarity at the centre of its work.” The U.N. would also “ensure that those most vulnerable to a complex, global shock, and those with least capacity to cope with its impacts, receive the necessary support from those with the means to do so.”

Continue reading “”

This movement could retake control of prosecutors’ offices: Our country needs a group of conservative prosecutors who are bold

The spate of politically motivated prosecutions against former President Donald Trump in recent months has further underscored how the left – with a big financial assist from liberal megadonor George Soros – has weaponized local district attorney offices to target their political enemies while failing to punish actual criminals. Conservatives desperately need an answer to this alarming trend to restore the rule of law in our country.

In addition to the Biden Department of Justice’s persecution of Trump, the former president has already faced an indictment from Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, and is also being targeted by Fulton County, Georgia, District Attorney Fani Willis and Westchester County, New York, District Attorney Miriam Roach.

All of these investigations are noticeably light on the facts and reek of partisan motivations. As I have written previously, Ms. Willis is reportedly attempting to charge President Trump under Georgia’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations statute, better known as RICO — a state-level version of the federal RICO law that prosecutors have used to target the mob and criminal gangs.

But these sham investigations are only a few of the many egregious derelictions of duty from Bragg, Willis, Roach, and their compatriots in the criminal justice “reform” movement.

So-called “reform” prosecutors have flat out refused to prosecute many crimes, leading to predictably disastrous results for their communities. In Manhattan, Bragg has downgraded 52 percent of felony cases to misdemeanors, while cutting sweetheart deals for rapists and murderers. In Fairfax County, Virginia, Steve Descano, another “reform” prosecutor, cut a plea deal with a child sex offender that was so lenient the judge told the victim, “your government has failed you.”

George Gascon in Los Angeles, Larry Krasner in Philadelphia, Kim Foxx in Chicago, and dozens of other radical left DAs have similarly tragic track records. Chesa Boudin in San Francisco and Kim Gardner in St. Louis have already been booted out of office before the end of their terms.

Far from acting independently of one another, all of these prosecutors are part of a cohesive national movement with a shared set of policy goals, including the elimination of cash bail, a drastic reduction in prison sentences, and a refusal to prosecute entire categories of crimes.

One of the biggest and most public patrons of this movement is George Soros, who has poured more than $35 million into DA races throughout the country via a complex network of PACs, dark money groups, and nonprofits. As these contests are typically low-dollar affairs compared to more high-profile state and federal races, that money has gone a long way. In some cases, Soros-backed candidates outraised their opponents by as much as 90 percent.

As of last June, Soros prosecutors represented some 72 million people – roughly one in five Americans.

The result has been the wave of violent crime that is now sweeping America’s cities. Murders in Los Angeles spiked from 258 in 2019 to 397 in 2021 and 382 last year. Violent crime is surging in Philadelphia and Chicago.

As Alvin Bragg has shown, these prosecutors are also willing to use the power of their offices to target their political opponents. For Soros and his far-left allies, installing loyal prosecutors is a cheap and effective way to bog down their political enemies in an endless sea of bogus litigation.

Replacing these “reform” prosecutors with candidates who will actually enforce the law and end the politicization of the justice system is a vital step toward securing our democracy and restoring public trust in the elected leaders charged with keeping our communities safe.

In order to accomplish this, conservatives need a unifying prosecutor movement of their own – one that upholds the rule of law rather than undermines it. One that pursues justice rather than perverts it. One that honors the hard work and sacrifices made by local law enforcement rather than seeks to defund it. One that remembers the lessons of Giuliani’s Manhattan and believes that small things like fixing broken windows matter. One that holds that the years 1789 and 1776 define our institutions rather than 1619.

Most importantly, our country needs a group of conservative prosecutors who are bold enough to say their communities: “we are not Manhattan, we are not Chicago, we are not St. Louis, we are not Los Angeles, and we are not San Francisco. If violent criminals hurt people in our community, we will not rest until justice is done.” In other words, “We’re your Huckleberry.”

By retaking control of prosecutors’ offices, conservatives can deliver a major blow to the radical left’s war on our institutions and republican system of government. For the future of our country, it is time to take a stand.

Is the international Counterterrorism Law Enforcement Forum a work-around of Americans’ rights?

The Second Annual Counterterrorism Law Enforcement Forum occurred on Tuesday June 6th, 2023, which the United States co-hosted. Last year was the inaugural event in Berlin, Germany and the 2023 forum took place in Oslo, Norway. The idea of multiple law enforcement agencies getting together to think tank their way around some of the world’s problems with terrorism, or any crime for that matter, is not that radical. Where things get concerning are when we read between the lines. The DOJ release masqueraded the forum as a meeting of the minds on combating acts of terror, however remarks from the U.S. Assistant Attorney General show a clear focus on “domestic” terrorism.

The Justice Department’s Office of Overseas Prosecutorial Development, Assistance and Training (OPDAT) and the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Counterterrorism (State CT) co-hosted the second annual meeting of the Counterterrorism Law Enforcement Forum (CTLEF) with the Government of Norway in Oslo from June 6 to 7.

The CTLEF, which focuses on countering the global threat of racially or ethnically motivated violent extremism (REMVE), brought together law enforcement, prosecutors, and other criminal justice practitioners from Europe and North and South America, as well as specialists from INTERPOL, Europol, the International Institute for Justice and the Rule of Law and other multilateral organizations to discuss how to effectively address and counter REMVE threats.

Drilling down on what REMVEs there are, our Assistant Attorney General, Matthew G. Olsen, did not hold back on discussing his ideas when he delivered the opening remarks for the forum.

Last May, we gathered in Berlin, for our inaugural meeting. I departed the forum daunted by the scale of the problem, but heartened to see the partnership of so many likeminded countries.

I returned to D.C. from Berlin on a Thursday. Two days later, on Saturday afternoon, I received the first alerts from the FBI that there was an active shooter in Buffalo, New York. What we would come to learn over the next hours and days was that an individual espousing white supremacist ideology took a semiautomatic weapon into a grocery store and murdered 10 people.

This tragedy in Buffalo – just over one year ago – is part of an alarming trend.

What’s the alarming trend that Olsen is really talking about? What were some of the threats that Olsen identified in his speech? “In particular, we face an increasing threat from racially and ethnically motivated violent extremist groups, including white supremacists and anti-government groups,” Olsen said. Who are classified as “anti-government groups”? Would people that are critical of the United States Government, in particular overreaching agencies, be considered anti-government?

Doubling down Olsen identified obstacles to being able to effectively police these groups of individuals.

The simple truth is that the ability of violent extremists to acquire military-grade weapons in our country contributes to their ability to kill and inflict harm on a massive scale. A recent article in The Washington Post noted that about a shocking number of Americans – one in 20 adults, or roughly 16 million people – own at least one AR-15 assault rifle.
…
It is important to be clear, the Department of Justice investigates violent extremists for their criminal acts and not for their beliefs or based on their associations, and regardless of ideology. In the United States, upholding our core values means respecting First Amendment rights and safeguarding the exercise of protected speech, peaceful protests, and political activity. We hold those rights sacred.

Olsen had no problem pairing the roughly 16 million law-abiding citizens with violent extremists, lumping them into the same category of hateful and murderous actors. The numbers should be staggering to Olsen that we do have 16+ million alleged owners of AR variant – not “assault” – rifles, and have such an incredibly small amount of issues with those arms.

The other obstacle naturally is the First Amendment. It’s grand that Olsen says that the DOJ et.al. respects and holds “those rights sacred,” but he really means that for only some people. It’s clear that if there’s an individual or group that does not align with the ideologies of the current swamp, they become an enemy of the state. When there’s “mostly peaceful” acts of extremism, that’s alright as long as it’s the correct flavor of extremism.

Whatever may stand in the way between the government and combating domestic terrorism, Olsen has the solution.

We have to be united in confronting domestic extremism within our countries. Collaboration and information sharing is essential to understanding and countering the threats that terrorist and violent extremist groups pose.

International partnerships are especially important where we observe transnational linkages in domestic violent extremism. We have seen some U.S.-based supporters of domestic terrorism attempt to establish links with likeminded foreign individuals and organizations. In some cases, U.S.-based domestic terrorists have traveled overseas to link up with counterparts who espouse the same beliefs.

These trends are one reason why international forums like this are so valuable. This is an opportunity to hear from foreign partners about the violent extremist groups and networks that are most concerning; where transnational linkages exist; how these actors are raising and moving funds; how groups are recruiting and training new members; how they are communicating and spreading their messages and propaganda; and the sources and drivers of radicalization to violence.

The Assistant Attorney General of the United States stated that in order to combat domestic extremism it’s important to “establish links with,” collaborate with, and find out how groups are “raising and moving funds; how groups are recruiting and training new members; how they are communicating and spreading their messages and propaganda,” from foreign governments. In short, Olsen wants foreign countries to do what our CIA can’t do; spy on Americans. There are no Fourth Amendment protections for American citizens when it’s a foreign entity doing the infringing.

Who all could this reference though? Bad guys, right? Those “anti-government” types. Olsen brought up the events that transpired on January 6th. Regardless of one’s view on what happened during January 6th, what occurred was not as bad as it’s been purported by mainstream media, nor were the actions completely benign.

Olsen spoke extensively about all the arrests and charges that sprung up in the wake of that day, “The January 6 investigation is the largest in the history of the Justice Department. We have arrested and charged more than 1,000 individuals who took part in the Capitol assault. Nearly 500 people have pled guilty or been convicted at trial.”

Olsen further observed concerning January 6th:

We have brought serious charges, including seditious conspiracy against numerous defendants – members of extremist groups who plotted to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power in our country.
…
We believe our success in this case serves as a stark warning to those who would seek to violently attack our government and our democracy. It makes clear our determination that the rule of law will prevail.

Not that we needed any confirmation that the DOJ would aggressively go after those that don’t help serve the bigger picture of what’s desired of the Biden-Harris administration, but this is the Assistant Attorney General saying as much in black and white. The “members of extremist groups who plotted to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power in our country” includes a whole lot of people that got arrested, charged and in some cases convicted, for simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time. The issues involving anything January 6th are so multi-faceted, to even bring the date up is flirting with disaster. Do what we say or you’ll end up like them.

On a small scale, Olsen found it problematic that 16+ million people have access to semi-automatic rifles. He clearly pegged that as an obstacle to being able to do the proper police work needed to fight “extremism” or those who are “anti-government.” Olsen further opined that our civil liberties are an issue, as there’s nothing they can do about people expressing their opinions, which the government “respects.” But alas, they found their solution in the form of partnerships with other countries, id.est., having other nations do the spying on the American people.

These events and little get-togethers that American officials attend sure seem like they’re “for the better good.” Really, no one wants extremism or terrorism, domestic or otherwise. However, if we read between the lines, eh, I’m going to say that maybe these trips on the taxpayers’ dime are not in the best interest of the people. Could this be a misread? Sure. But they kind of make it clear that they’ve adopted a Conan approach; “crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women.” But, clearly it’s the AR’s that are the problems…

3 years ago, this would have gotten one smeared as a racist science denier.

It’s becoming undeniable: COVID came from a Chinese lab.

Evidence that COVID came from a Chinese lab mounted toward a conclusive level last week: “Multiple government sources” say the very first people infected by the bug were Wuhan Institute of Virology researchers, a new report reveals.

More, they were allegedly modifying a close relative of the virus with a key feature unique to it.

The report — by Michael Shellenberger, Matt Taibbi and Alex Gutentag, posted on the outlet Public — names Ben Hu, Yu Ping and Yan Zhu as WIV scientists who developed COVID symptoms as early as November 2019, a month before the world even heard of the outbreak, and who now appear to be “patients zero.”

A source said officials were “100%” certain these three were the ones who developed the symptoms.

It’s “a game changer if it can be proven that Hu got sick with COVID-19 before anyone else,” marvels World Health Organization expert Jamie Metzl. “That would be the ‘smoking gun.’ Hu was the lead hands-on researcher” in the WIV lab.

Add in all the other evidence — especially the scientists’ gain-of-function work using a close relative of the COVID bug — and it’s now impossible to ignore the extreme likelihood that a leak from the lab sparked the global pandemic behind nearly 7 million deaths and untold economic harm.

It also points a damning finger at China for having waged the greatest coverup in history of the world — abetted by Westerners from Dr. Anthony Fauci to Big Tech to countless liberals and left-leaning media voices who misled the public by pooh-poohing the lab-leak theory early on, and actively suppressing those who pointed to evidence backing the theory.

Continue reading “”

While the clueless losers chant “RUSSIA! RUSSIA! RUSSIA!” , our goobermint has allowed Chinese commies to run amok in the U.S.

Chinese Intel Arm Quietly Operates ‘Service Centers’ In 7 US Cities

A Chinese intelligence agency quietly operates “service centers” in seven American cities, all of which have had contact with Beijing’s national police authority, according to state media reports and government records reviewed by the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) United Front Work Department (UFWD) — which at least one U.S. government commission has characterized as a “Chinese intelligence service” — operates so-called “Overseas Chinese Service Centers” (OCSCs) that are housed within various U.S.-based nonprofits. OCSCs were ostensibly set up to promote Chinese culture and assist Chinese citizens living abroad, according to Chinese government records.

State media reports, Chinese government records and social media posts show that during a 2018 trip to China, U.S.-based OCSC representatives met with Ministry of Public Security (MPS) officials. During the meeting, state security officials demonstrated how they’re leveraging new technology to conduct “cross-border remote justice services” overseas.

MPS is China’s national police authority and has been referred to as “China’s FBI” by China experts. The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) says MPS also conducts covert “intelligence and national security operations far beyond China’s borders,” including “illicit, transnational repression schemes” on U.S. soil.

Continue reading “”

PROJECTION, BIDEN STYLE

The New York Post reports on President Biden musing to the press before he boarded the plane to hit the campaign trail in Philadelphia yesterday. The White House has helped us along with a transcript. Here we have a pure case of projection, Biden style:

President Biden kicked off his first day of campaigning for re-election by making excuses for communist China — saying that President Xi Jinping never meant to fly a spy balloon over sensitive American military sites earlier this year.

“I don’t think the leadership knew where it was, and knew what was in it, and knew what was going on,” Biden told reporters Saturday as he headed to Philadelphia for his first campaign rally of the 2024 election. “I think it was more embarrassing than it was intentional.”

Biden does everything thing but thank the Chinese Communists for taking an interest in our military installations. What do they have on him? I should like to think that no one can be this stupid without motivation.

As I noted in “Lost horizon” and again in “The Biden two-step,” the CCP regime goes out of its way to show its disrespect of Biden. “Contempt” is probably more like it. Gordon Chang shows how in the 1945 column: “Secretary Blinken’s Visit To China Is One Giant Mistake.”

Who on earth could have seen this coming?

Remember when Obammy’s communications office tried to pretend he was the anti-1984 guy?

Obama suggests ‘digital fingerprints’ to counter misinformation ‘so we know what’s true and what’s not true.’

Former President Barack Obama suggested in a new interview the development of “digital fingerprints” to combat misinformation and distinguish between true and misleading news for consumers.

Obama sat down with his former White House senior adviser David Axelrod for a conversation on the latter’s podcast, “The Axe Files,” on CNN Audio. During the interview, Axelrod noted he’s seen “misinformation, disinformation, [and] deepfakes” targeting Obama.

“As I’ve told people, because I was the first digital president when I left office, I was probably the most recorded, filmed, photographed human in history, which is kind of a weird thing,” responded Obama. “But just the odds are that I was. As a consequence, there’s a lot of raw material there.”

The former president added that the deepfakes — digitally manipulated images, audio or video that appear legitimate — started with a version of him dancing, “saying dirty limericks” and similar kinds of activity.

“That technology’s here now,” continued Obama, who warned about the issue getting worse moving forward. “So, most immediately we’re going to have all the problems we had with misinformation before, [but] this next election cycle will be worse.”

He then suggested “digital fingerprints” to discern truth from misinformation.

“And the need for us, for the general public, I think to be more discriminating consumers of news and information, the need for us to over time develop technologies to create watermarks or digital fingerprints so we know what is true and what is not true,” he said. “There’s a whole bunch of work that’s going to have to be done there, but in the short term, it’s really going to be up to the American people to kind of say.”

Obama and Axelrod went on to say that today many consumers are only viewing information from sources they are predisposed to agree with and will likely believe what they see.

“Obviously, we saw that during the vaccination stuff. So, I am concerned about it,” added Obama, referring to the COVID vaccine. “And I think the best we’re going to be able to do is to constantly remind people that this is out there.”

The former president said he thinks most people are now aware that “not everything that pops up on your phone is true,” but cautioned misinformation can be used to discourage people from voting by characterizing the system as rigged and corrupt.

“That can oftentimes advantage the powerful,” said Obama. “And I am worried about that kind of cynicism developing even further during the course of this next election.”

The interview came about six weeks after the Obama Foundation on World Press Freedom Day posted a recent video of the former president lecturing about “widespread disinformation” and the need for journalists to create “an information environment” to support democracy.

Last year, Obama announced that his foundation would be launching a new initiative to combat misinformation. Days later, Obama angered conservatives with a speech at Stanford University warning of the dangers of “disinformation.”

During the speech, Obama said, “All we see is a constant feed of content where useful factual information and happy diversions, and cat videos flow alongside lies, conspiracy theories, junk science, quackery, White supremacist, racist tracts, misogynist screeds.”

Critics were quick to point out that Obama promoted the debunked narrative that former President Donald Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election and that Obama infamously won Politifact’s “Lie of the Year” in 2013 by telling Americans, “If you like your health care plan, you can keep it,” referring to the Affordable Care Act.

More recently, the Biden administration came under fire for trying to start the now-defunct Disinformation Governance Board under the Department of Homeland Security. Many Republicans argued such an initiative would act as a Ministry of Truth in a dystopian society by suppressing dissent under the guise of stopping misinformation.

Homeland Committee Chairman: China Likely Sending Military Personnel Into U.S.

On Wednesday, Congressman Mark Green (R-Tenn.), Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, claimed that the People’s Republic of China is likely sending military personnel into the United States via the southern border with Mexico.

According to Just The News, Chairman Green made the revelation at a press conference, where he also announced a new investigation into Alejandro Mayorkas, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). In his remarks, Congressman Green said that “Chinese Nationals, many of whom are military-aged men” and have ties to the ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP), are crossing the southern border among the hordes of third-world illegal aliens, and have similarly been released into the United States by the Biden Administration.

“We have no idea who these people are and it’s very likely, using Russia’s template of sending military personnel into Ukraine, China is doing the same in the United States,” said Green, who also said that the claims were verified by a Border Patrol sector chief.

In concurrence with Green’s remarks, the Homeland Security Committee released a report on Wednesday revealing that the number of apprehensions of Chinese nationals at the southern border has increased significantly since Biden took power.

At least 10,000 Chinese illegals were encountered at the border during the time period between October 2022 and April 2023, the report states. During the same period of time in the previous year, that number was down to just 2,200.

The revelations highlight a major national security risk associated with the Biden Administration’s open-borders approach to immigration. Biden and the Democratic Party as a whole have vowed to provide amnesty to millions of illegals, as well as numerous free taxpayer-funded benefits, including education, healthcare, and housing.