WARNING: READ THIS POST WITH A BUCKET ON THE FLOOR NEXT TO YOU. YOU WILL POSSIBLY THROW UP AFTER READING THIS POST.

Does this explain why Facebook suppressed Hunter Biden revelations?

By Andrea Widburg

American Thinker

October 18, 2020

The moment the New York Post reported on some of the sleazy, corrupt details contained on Hunter Biden’s hard drive, Twitter and Facebook, the social media giants most closely connected to the way Americans exchange political information, went into overdrive to suppress the information and protect Joe Biden. In the case of Facebook, though, perhaps one of those protectors was, in fact, protecting herself.

The person currently in charge of Facebook’s election integrity program is Anna Makanju. That name probably doesn’t mean a lot to you, but it should mean a lot – and in a comforting way — to Joe Biden.

Before ending up at Facebook, Makanju was a nonresident Senior Fellow at the Atlantic Council. The Atlantic Council is an ostensibly non-partisan think tank that deals with international affairs. In fact, it’s a decidedly partisan organization.

In 2009, James L. Jones, the Atlantic Council’s chairman left the organization to be President Obama’s National Security Advisor. Susan Rice, Richard Holbrooke, Eric Shinseki, Anne-Marie Slaughter, Chuck Hagel, and Brent Scowcroft also were all affiliated with the Atlantic Council before they ended up in the Obama administration.

The Atlantic Council has received massive amounts of foreign funding over the years. Here’s one that should interest everyone: Burisma Holdings donated $300,000 dollars to the Atlantic Council, over the course of three consecutive years, beginning in 2016. The information below may explain why it began paying that money to the Council.

Not only was the Atlantic Council sending people into the Obama-Biden administration, but it was also serving as an outside advisor. And that gets us back to Anna Makanju, the person heading Facebook’s misleadingly titled “election integrity program.”Makanju also worked at the Atlantic Council. The following is the relevant part of Makanju’s professional bio from her page at the Atlantic Council (emphasis mine):

Anna Makanju is a nonresident senior fellow with the Transatlantic Security Initiative. She is a public policy and legal expert working at Facebook, where she leads efforts to ensure election integrity on the platform. Previously, she was the special policy adviser for Europe and Eurasia to former US Vice President Joe Biden, senior policy adviser to Ambassador Samantha Power at the United States Mission to the United Nations, director for Russia at the National Security Council, and the chief of staff for European and NATO Policy in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. She has also taught at the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton University and worked as a consultant to a leading company focused on space technologies.

Makanju was a player in the faux Ukraine impeachment. Early in December 2019, when the Democrats were gearing up for the impeachment, Glenn Kessler mentioned her in an article assuring Washington Post readers that, contrary to the Trump administration’s claims, there was nothing corrupt about Biden’s dealings with Ukraine. He made the point then that Biden now raises as a defense: Biden didn’t pressure Ukraine to fire prosecutor Viktor Shokin to protect Burisma; he did it because Shokin wasn’t doing his job when it came to investigating corruption.

Kessler writes that, on the same day in February 2016 that then-Ukrainian President Poroshenko announced that Shokin had offered his resignation, Biden spoke to both Poroshenko and Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk. The White House version is that Biden gave both men pep talks about reforming the government and fighting corruption. And that’s where Makanju comes in:Anna Makanju, Biden’s senior policy adviser for Ukraine at the time, also listened to the calls and said release of the transcripts would only strengthen Biden’s case that he acted properly. She helped Biden prepare for the conversations and said they operated at a high level, with Biden using language such as Poroshenko’s government being 

A reference to a private company such as Burisma would be “too fine a level of granularity” for a call between Biden and the president of another country, Makanju told The Fact Checker. Instead, she said, the conversation focused on reforms demanded by the International Monetary Fund, methods to tackle corruption and military assistance. An investigation of “Burisma was just not significant enough” to mention, she said.

Let me remind you, in case you forgot, that Burisma started paying the Atlantic Council a lot of money in 2016, right when Makanju was advising Biden regarding getting rid of Shokin.

In other words, there’s a really good chance that Sundance was correct when he wrote at The Conservative Treehouse:That’s right folks, the Facebook executive currently blocking all of the negative evidence of Hunter and Joe Biden’s corrupt activity in Ukraine is the same person who was coordinating the corrupt activity between the Biden family payoffs and Ukraine.You just cannot make this stuff up folks.

The incestuous networking between Democrats in the White House, Congress, the Deep State, the media, and Big Tech never ends. That’s why the American people wanted and still want Trump, the true outsider, to head the government. They know that Democrats have turned American politics into one giant Augean Stable and that Trump is the Hercules who (we hope) can clean it out.

UPDATE: It turns out that Makanju also has a Soros connection, for she received a fellowship from a foundation that Soros’s brother, Paul, and his wife, Daisy, created for immigrants and their children. It does not appear that Paul Soros was part of his brother’s empire, but the Soros connection is still intriguing, as well as being another reminder that, no matter where you look on the left, the same names keep turning up.

Email Link  https://conta.cc/31mcJUk

Rip McIntosh
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

REGARDLESS OF HOW THE Hunter Biden HARD DRIVE EMAILS DRAMA PLAYS OUT IN THE NEAR TERM, THE REPERCUSSIONS FROM IT WILL OCCUPY OUR ATTENTION FOR MONTHS TO COME, UNLESS Joe Biden WINS ELECTION, IN WHICH CASE WE WILL LEARN NO MORE THAN WE PRESENTLY KNOW

Big Mistake – Social Media Blocking Biden Emails

By Robert B. Charles AMAC

October 19, 2020 

A complex story is unfolding – based on discovery of a hard-drive belonging to the son of former Vice President Joe Biden. On that hard-drive are emails that appear to confirm activities by both men – potentially criminal, at least highly untruthful. Revealed by a newspaper, the story was suppressed by social media outlets. See, e.g., https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2020/10/14/election-interference-facebook-suppressing-new-york-post-bombshell-story-of-damaging-hunter-biden-emails/.

Cries of foul by Trump supporters, who can see no legal basis for suppressing evidence of untruthfulness and potential criminality before an election have triggered an avalanche of pre-election activity.

First, the outcry to republish the facts continues. That outcry was met by counter-cries that emails could be true-but-hacked. The counter-counter-cry is that the source is known and honest, no evidence of hacking exists, and if even hacked, facts matter. The information is of enormous “public concern.”  See, e.g., https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2020/10/yes-the-hunter-biden-emails-are-authentic-by-larry-c-johnson.html; and https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hunter-biden-emails-senate-homeland-security-committee-investigating-hard-drive-laptop.

Second, potential misuse of power and political bias by social media companies has inflamed the US Senate. Pre-election hearings are planned, letters to the FBI multiplying. Likely to focus on antitrust regulation and civil liability, they will delve into information suppression. See, e.g.,  https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-donald-trump-amazoncom-inc-media-misinformation-831341e1d56e48b5100375a2fd9d27b6; and https://www.foxnews.com/politics/senate-republicans-call-on-twitter-facebook-bosses-to-testify-amid-censorship-claims-say-subpoena-in-the-works; and www.dailywire.com/news/numerous-lawmakers-send-letter-to-fbi-director-demanding-answers-about-hunter-biden-laptop.

The backdrop for these hearings is a report – dating back months – calling for regulation of social media giants and ending liability exemptions in section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act. The latest incident is salt in the wound, raising the stakes for social media outlets, suggesting a need for accountability. See, e.g., https://www.nationalreview.com/news/senate-republicans-take-aim-at-liability-protections-for-social-media-companies-ahead-of-november-election/.

Third, in concert with new civil liability – for libel, tort, contract, election law violations – the Republican National Committee is suing at least one social media outlet for “in-kind” political donations to Biden, via suppression of the incriminating emails. See, e.g., https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/tyler-o-neil/2020/10/16/rnc-files-fec-complaint-twitter-gave-in-kind-contribution-to-biden-campaign-n1064081.

Fourth, new evidence is emerging – suggesting the FBI may have had access to the incriminating hard-drive and emails in late 2019, as the impeachment process was unfolding. If incriminating emails were available, the source known, and they offered exculpatory material – which would have assisted in the President’s defense – the question is, why were they not made available at the time?  See, e.g., https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-gop-fbi-hunter-biden-laptop; and https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hunter-biden-emails-giuliani-attorney-fbi. At hearings – perhaps in other contexts – the FBI Director will have to answer.

Fifth, a wider question hangs over this entire discussion – like a giant umbrella. What role should increasingly powerful social media platforms play in the future. Should they be regulated, subject to civil lawsuits, antitrust law, broken up, held to a higher standard of care than at present?

Does exercising editorial control and manipulating third-party content change their legal status and obligations to the public? Should they remain exempt from civil liability as “interactive computer service” organizations – a provision intended to nurture a onetime fledgling industry – or have they outgrown that protection?

If they can selectively suppress information on matters of public concern, potentially influencing a presidential election by content control, what implications does that have? Where do they fit, if at all, into public forum law? See, e.g., https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/824/public-forum-doctrine. They are not government, but their power is considerable, verging on monopoly or oligopoly.

Finally, in some ways, all these questions vector to a simpler question.  What is social media?  Is it more like television or telephone, newspaper editor or delivery boy, email domain or public bulletin board?

Has social media become so powerful that – in effect – it is a “public forum,” and must be managed that way, even though not formally part of the government? Is it like a public park – or use of private space for public speaking – and if so, what kinds of restrictions are reasonable? If it must block criminal activity, can it also block political opinions with which private owners disagree? Is that reasonable?

Unfortunately, just as we enter the swift current of an enormously important national election, these questions have popped again. They are legal, but also political – and not likely to be resolved before the election.

In time, the Biden story will be known, Senate hearings held, Section 230 scrutinized, election violations decided, antitrust regulation and civil liability reconsidered, FBI behavior reexamined, and social media put under bright lights.

What all this activity reminds us is that – like it or not – we live in a complex world, characterized by fast, concentrated, unaccountable, increasingly manipulable communications technology – on which we all depend.
Implications are social, professional, legal, and political. They raise profound questions of trust – in modern technology and who controls it, the integrity of our institutions and democratic process, as well as how we relate to each other.

In time we will sort these questions out. But presently, evaluating the Biden email revelations and what they mean – we are at a disadvantage. The law is unsettled, complex and needs to be resolved – but the election is just days away.

While the First Amendment is sacrosanct, manipulation of highly sensitive content – credible news that can affect an election – by powerful, unregulated, legally sheltered “interactive computer services” should be forbidden. 
Time is short. Facts matter. The full story should be out – and social media should help get it out.

Email Link   https://conta.cc/3jaL66M

RIP MCINTOSH
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

IF THE CONTENT OF HUNTER BIDEN’S COMPUTER HARD DRIVE HAD BEEN RELEASED WHEN IT WAS RECEIVED BY THE FBI IN NOVEMBER 2019 Bernie Sanders WOULD NOW BE THE Democratic Party NOMINEE FOR PRESIDENT

Steve Bannon: “If the Content of the [Biden] Hard Drive had been Released [by the FBI]… Bernie Sanders would be the Democratic Party Nominee”

Former President Donald Trump adviser Steve Bannon told Revolver News, “If the content of the hard drive had been released when received in November 2019, there would have been no impeachment of Trump, and Bernie Sanders would be the Democratic Party nominee”: 

“The President must confront the director of the FBI on why the information housed on this hard drive was not moved on immediately. If the content of the hard drive had been released when received in November 2019, there would have been no impeachment of Trump, and Bernie Sanders would be the Democratic Party nominee. This confrontation should take place this weekend in the Oval Office. If FBI Director Wray doesn’t have a bulletproof reason he should be fired in the room.” [https://mundabor.wordpress.com/2020/10/19/steve-bannon-on-biden-inc/]

Why are Bernie Sanders supporters not protesting and rioting?

That was a bad question because they are protesting and rioting.

A better question is:

Why aren’t Bernie Sanders supporters demanding that Joe Biden step down and Sanders replace him as the Democratic Party nominee?

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Mass and the Church as well as for the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Hunter Biden’s laptop is a laptop from hell. A giant trove of emails show Hunter Biden making deals, setting up meetings with his father Joe, and using the office of the vice president for a for-profit cash machine. … People think of Joe Biden as a nice man. He’s not a nice man. He’s a corrupt man. … Joe Biden is and always has been a corrupt politician. Joe is far more corrupt than Hunter. The Biden family is a criminal enterprise.

Joe Biden’s Quid Pro Quo Crime Syndicate

This is not a “Hunter” problem; it’s a “Joe” problem. 

BY: MARK ALEXANDER

The Patriot Post

October 19, 2020


We can now verify that Joe Biden, in his 47 years as a statist Swamp Rat, created at least one constituent job — a very lucrative position for Hunter Biden, the underboss of Joe’s family crime syndicate.


At the same time the Bidens were arranging side deals for big bucks with the Red Chinese, Joe sat by as millions of American jobs were lost to cheap China labor — the jobs Donald Trump has worked tirelessly to bring home. While President Trump was negotiating fairer trade terms with China, the ChiComs were placing their bets on a future Joe Biden presidency.


As Thomas Gallatin wrote last week, the emails tying Joe Biden directly with pay-to-play Ukraine and China quid pro quos have cracked the Biden facade, and Joe’s career of corruption is becoming more apparent by the day. But there was no coverage of that corruption from the Demos’ Leftmedia talkingheads, other than repeating the Biden campaign claim that it was all a “smear campaign.” Of course, Big Tech dutifully censored the reports so they could not be circulated on social media.


Predictably, in the “town hall” softball pitches to Biden last Thursday, not a word was asked about the scandal. Political analyst David Marcus declared, “Let me be blunt — George Stephanopoulos’s failure to ask Joe Biden about this bombshell New York Post story is the most egregious example of journalistic malpractice that I have ever seen, and that’s a very competitive category these days.”


But if Biden is not asked by the partisan Demo moderator of the next presidential debate this Thursday night, I can assure you Trump will ask him, repeatedly. It will be interesting to see how Biden attempts to throw off the scent ahead of that dueling confab.


We have been rightly cautious about the veracity of Hunter Biden’s emails, and I continue to maintain 10% skepticism. Likewise, Senator Ron Johnson, chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, asked the FBI to verify the hard drive communications: “As the first step in our due diligence, committee staff contacted FBI officials and asked for confirmation of certain facts in an attempt to validate the whistleblower’s claims and assertions. Unfortunately, several days later, the FBI responded that it would not confirm or deny any information identified by the committee even though several of our questions were not related to the possible existence of an ongoing grand jury investigation.”


That notwithstanding, for the MSM to black out news about the communications while claiming they were “unverified” is inexcusable. After breaking the story, the New York Post’s editorial board noted“The New York Times and Washington Post reporting that built vast hysteria over ‘Russiagate’ in the administration’s first days [was] all rooted in ‘opposition research’ commissioned by Hillary Clinton’s campaign, or … Clinton partisans in the Obama administration. … Desperate for Biden to win, they want to sink the [Ukraine and ChiCom] story with innuendo rather than actually report on it. Don’t ask too many questions, and you can dismiss it all as ‘unverified.’”
The fact that the “Russia collusion” fabrication was wholly unverified certainly didn’t stop the Leftmedia from immediately and endlessly pushing that leftist narrative for the next three years.


The difference between that fabrication and the Biden emails — and it’s a BIG difference — is that Fox News has now verified one of the most damaging emails tying Joe Biden to an access-for-profit scheme with the ChiComs. In one email, there is a reference to a percentage of the ownership profits: “10 held by H for the big guy.” Another party copied in that email has now verified its authenticity and confirmed that “the big guy” is Joe Biden.


And former federal prosecutor Rudy Giuliani, now President Trump’s personal attorney, says that before he released any of the emails to The Post he had already verified dates and context with a confidential informant. Additionally, according to Beth Baumann, “Based on what’s known, Giuliani stated Hunter Biden should be in prison for failing to register as a foreign agent, which is what Paul Manafort went to jail for.” According to Giuliani, Hunter Biden had no such registration either. Oh, by the way, neither did Joe Biden.


Giuliani promises there are more communications to come.Meanwhile, sticking with the script, when Biden was finally caught off guard and asked about the emails directly, he replied: “It’s another smear campaign.” As commentator Laura Ingram notes: “This is how they get away with it. It’s a ‘smear campaign’ when there’s an email trail, but it’s good journalism when it’s suppositions set up by the deep state, as in [the fake Russian dossier].


If they can’t spin the hard drive coms as a “Russian fabrication,” Biden and his Demo/Leftmedia machine will endeavor to spin this as a “Hunter Biden” problem. But as seasoned political observer John Hinderaker makes clear, “Of course, the issue isn’t Hunter — a sad, drug-addled case — but rather the light that the documents shed on the corrupt career of Joe Biden. The Post’s documents show a level of corruption that is remarkable even by Swamp standards.


According to President Trump, “That’s a laptop from hell. A giant trove of emails show Hunter Biden making deals, setting up meetings with his father Joe, and using the office of the vice president for a for-profit cash machine. … People think of Joe Biden as a nice man. He’s not a nice man. He’s a corrupt man. … Joe Biden is and always has been a corrupt politician. Joe is far more corrupt than Hunter. The Biden family is a criminal enterprise.


Finally, as I wrote last January, and other sources now agree, Democrats impeached Trump in an election year for what Joe Biden actually did. There is now additional corroborating evidence of Biden’s corruption. And House investigators want to know why, if the FBI had the Biden hard drives last December, this was not made known during the impeachment inquisition.


Email Link   https://conta.cc/3kpBhD6

Rip McIntosh

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

HERE IS THE BACK STORY OF THE HISTORY OF JOE AND HUNTER BIDEN’S SELLING OF THE United States FOR MORE THAN A MESS OF POTAGE TO RED CHINA

https://mobile.twitter.com/all50news/status/1317080910504824832?prefetchtimestamp=1603044644924

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

PIECE BY PIECE, OUR CIVILIZATION IS BEGINNING TO DISASSEMBLE AND THE AGENTS OF FRAGMENTATION ARE AS OBVIOUS AS THE EFFORTS TO CONCEAL THEM ARE FRANTIC

The Fragments of a Civilization
Government crimes and coverups, a corrupt media, a candidate hiding and lying to the public, and plans to undo the foundations of the republic

By VICTOR DAVIS HANSON

October 13, 2020 

Piece by piece, our civilization is beginning to disassemble. And the agents of fragmentation are as obvious as the efforts to conceal them are frantic.

St. Hillary the Colluder

In nonchalant fashion, we learned last week from newly released government documents that Hillary Clinton’s campaign team cooked up the Trump-Russia collusion hoax as a way of diverting attention from her own ongoing embarrassing email scandals.

Clinton, through three firewalls, paid foreign ex-spy Christopher Steele to create a bogus smear-Trump dossier. Steele, who had no data on, or information about any such collusion, apparently drew largely on fabrications dreamed up by a former Russian spy working at the liberal Brookings Institution. The convoluted conspiracy baffled even the sneaky Russians, who were confused when they got wind of it — possibly through the direct participation of one of their own assets.

Did we then spend millions of dollars on Robert Mueller’s nearly two-year investigation, a wild goose chase consuming millions of collective media hours hyping fantasies, and paralyzing an administration for three years — all for Hillary Clinton’s machinations, the apparent true and only Russian colluder?

John Brennan’s CIA intercepted Russian concerns over such a ruse. He even briefed President Obama on the Clinton caper. Yet the U.S. investigatory and judicial branches did not stop Clinton’s efforts to subvert a rival’s campaign. Indeed, many of the highest officials of the Obama administration shortly joined her efforts to seed the fraudulent Steele dossier throughout the Obama government and thus into the media as well — their efforts peaking in timely fashion right before the November 2016 election.

Translate all that, and the evidence grows that Hillary Clinton, in felonious fashion, paid for the Steele dossier to subvert an election and, after the election, to destroy a presidential transition and indeed a presidency itself — government efforts that historians one day will assess as the most intense effort on record to destroy a U.S. president.

These crimes were committed with the apparent cooperation of at least some in the Obama DOJ, FBI, and CIA, along with their epigones who were deeply embedded in the administrative state when Trump won the election. The tactics of such a strategy included altering federal documents, lying to a FISA court, leaking classified information, illegally surveilling American citizens, conspiring to frame top administration officials such as General Michael Flynn, unmasking names in confidential intercepts and leaking them to the media — and lying under oath about the above and more.

Hillary’s efforts constitute the most egregious scandal in American election history. And yet, shameless to the end, she continues to foam about “Trump collusion,” in the manner of a beached whale, gasping for air and twitching about on the sand.

Hackery

In nonchalant fashion, we also just learned that CrowdStrike — a company in which the Pelosis made an initial $1 million investment and that is now run by billionaire Shawn Henry, a former high official of Robert Mueller’s FBI — was given the sole proprietorship of the hacked DNC computers. Has the FBI ever allowed the victims of a felonious federal crime to conduct their own forensic investigations?

The FBI outsourced the analysis even though the computer hard drives were the key evidence at the crime scene of a supposed conspiracy, allegedly cooked up by the Russians.

The scandal was not just that the FBI did not object to a private company taking over its own responsibility for the investigation. Worse still, for two years Washington insiders have known that CrowdStrike’s president had testified before Congress that he had no evidence that any Russians had hacked the DNC computers.

His secret testimony — apparently also known to Mueller’s investigators — came at a time when the nation was convulsed by the media-driven Russian hoax, much of the frenzy generated by MSNBC, where Henry himself had been an occasional “security” analyst.

We may never know how, why, or by whom the computers were hacked, only that the DNC and the Clinton campaign most certainly did not want any government agency investigating those mysteries.

If Biden wins in 2021, as surely as the sun rises, all the current investigations into the illegal weaponization of the DOJ, the FBI, and the CIA will abruptly cease within days.

De-debating

n nonchalant fashion, we also belatedly learned that the moderator of the vice-presidential debate, Susan Page, a USA Today Washington News Bureau Chief, is currently writing a biography of arch-Trump antagonist Nancy Pelosi. (Would the Biden campaign have objected if a debate moderator was now writing a likely favorable biography of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell?)

At about the same time, it was belatedly disclosed that the designated moderator of the now cancelled second presidential debate, Steven Scully, once worked as an intern for debate participant Joe Biden. (Would the Biden campaign have objected had the moderator once interned for the Trump organization?)

Apparently, Scully also had mistakenly sent a message over the public Twitter airways — rather than through intended private direct messaging — seeking the advice of now prominent Trump hater and fired former Trump press secretary Anthony Scaramucci. Scully asked the “Mooch” whether to respond to Trump’s charges that he was biased — though Scaramucci is the most publicly biased of all self-described media experts. (Would the Biden campaign have objected if it learned that the debate moderator had been communicating with Kellyanne Conway for advice on how to reply to criticism from Biden?)
Is America so short of informed beltway creatures that it cannot find, if only for the purpose of appearances, a single moderator who has not either interned for Joe Biden or Donald Trump, or who is not currently writing a bio of a Trump-hating or Biden-hating public figure?

Worse still, Scully deleted his tweet, froze his account from public access, and claimed that his computer was “hacked.” “Hacked” is now the operative defense when caught in embarrassing electronic communications. To avoid responsibility for their own embarrassing actions, Joy Reid, Anderson Cooper, and Anthony Wiener also claimed, probably falsely, that their phone or social-media accounts had been hacked.

Had the debate taken place, one wonders whether Scully, much like Fox’s Chris Wallace and USA Today’s Susan Page, would have zeroed in on Trump, in similar gottcha, moralistic fashion to explain why we should not presume him to be untruthful or racist.

The morning after we saw the recent, live vice-presidential debate carried out successfully with proper social distancing and testing precautions, the Commission on Presidential Debates abruptly insisted that the second presidential debate, to be moderated by Scully, would be virtual for the first time in American history.

The commission — an ostensibly bipartisan group that nonetheless consists exclusively of Democrats and Never Trumpers — knows that Trump thrives on “reality” television while Biden has crafted a unique campaign based almost entirely on remote communications through Skype and Zoom, often with the assistance of poorly concealed teleprompters and scripted talking points.

Moreover, when a candidate leads, as the mainstream polling suggests Biden now does, debates are considered unnecessary hazards, even as underdogs see them as critical chances to reboot campaign momentum.

The commission’s decision came even though the president’s doctors reported that by October 15, Trump would be medically fit to participate and virtually immune for months from reinfection. In addition, as with most asymptomatic and recovered patients with viral antibodies, Trump would be unable to pass on the virus for months, if ever.

In other words, Biden — and anyone else present — would have had far less chance of being infected by Trump in the now cancelled second debate than during the first debate.

Issues Are Bad

In nonchalant fashion, Joe Biden just announced that he will rule neither in nor out the Democratic plan to “pack” the Supreme Court to either 13 or 15 justices, should he win and the Senate flip Democratic.As Biden put it to his questioner:I know it’s a great question, and you all, I don’t blame you for asking, but you know the moment I answer that question, that headline in every one of your papers will be about that, other than, other than focusing on what’s happening now.

Biden was only clarifying what he had said earlier in the first debate when he stonewalled with, “Whatever position I take on that, that’ll become the issue.”
That incoherence was a further clarification of an earlier admission that the inquiry was “a legitimate question” but one that Biden was “not going to answer.”

And most recently Biden quadrupled down and insisted that voters do not “deserve” an honest answer on whether their Supreme Court will be packed — as he reverted to his bizarre earlier campaign mode of “lying, dog-faced pony soldier,” “You’re a damn liar, man” and “Look, fat, look. Here’s the deal.”
If we follow all the contorted Biden logic, he seems to now believe that the public has a reasonable interest in what he would do about enlarging the Court to nullify Trump’s conservative picks — but that the public nonetheless doesn’t deserve to know.

And Biden will not meet that “legitimate” but undeserved public interest, because, by answering, his very response would become the “issue.” That is, Biden would take a position on an issue, and therefore either delight or offend many voters. And he must avoid that at all costs.

Biden’s answer may be the most surreal response of any presidential candidate in memory.

But it is emblematic of his entire stealth campaign, in collusion with a cheerleading media — a virtual candidate who has no answers to questions that are now rarely asked.

Any reporter, debate moderator, or journalist who asked a question that Biden could not answer or that would in any way embarrass Biden would now earn lifetime ostracism and career beltway ruin for aiding and abetting the Prince of Darkness and the enemies of progressivism.

The current Democratic Party, hostage to the hard-core Left, has asserted that in victory it may seek to pack the Supreme Court and thereby end a 150-year law governing that nine-member body. It has also said it might end the 170-year-old Senate filibuster, on cue from Barack Obama, who as a senator nonetheless found the filibuster useful when he was in the minority. It claims it might do away with the 233-year-old Electoral College, a foundation of the U.S. Constitution that sought to ensure a republic rather than a democracy ruled by the 51 percent and urban centers.

Biden will no longer repeat his earlier no-fracking pandering, but his party (“I am the Democratic Party right now”) has often said it will end fracking. Fracking, remember, has helped to lower world oil prices, to the detriment of Russia and the Middle East. Fracking has helped to keep American troops out of Middle East interventions (remember the now calcified slogan “no blood for oil”?), aided middle-class commuters, created millions of well-paying jobs, and made electricity cheaper, and the air far cleaner.

On all these questions, Biden will offer no answers to voters who do not “deserve” to know. Yet he could very well seek to change the core rules by which America is governed — as part of a larger project to ensure systemic progressive dominance.

He has no answers because to answer honestly would either reveal himself to be a leftist pawn now and thus an anathema to the suburban swing voter; or, contrarily, he’d be exposed as an oath-breaker in the eyes of the AOC–Bernie Sanders socialist near majority of his own party.

So in Orwellian fashion, “issues” can no longer be issues, even if they could alter the United States in a way not seen since its founding.

Sleepwalking to the Revolution

To paraphrase Sophocles, 2020 saw many strange things and nothing stranger than peak Trump derangement syndrome, COVID-19, a self-induced recession, our first national quarantine, and riots, looting, and arson, all mostly unpunished and uncontrolled, in our major cities.

So we are in revolutionary times, even as we snooze about a recent systematic effort, hidden with great effort by our own government, to destroy a prior presidential campaign and transition, and now a presidency.

We are asked to vote for a candidate who will not reveal his position on any major issue of our age, because he feels to do so would enlighten the undeserving electorate and thereby cost him the election. So we continue to sleepwalk toward a revolution whose architects warped our institutions in 2016–2020, and they now plan to alter many of them beyond recognition in 2021.

Translated, that means that they don’t regret what they did in 2016–2019, only that they belatedly got caught for a brief time.

And so by changing the rules after 2020, they are vowing never ever to get caught again.

Email Link https://conta.cc/3obbZLF

Rip McIntosh

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

TRUTH IS STRANGER THAN FICTON: THIS IS ALMOST UNBELIEVABLE, BUT YOU HAD BETTER BELIEVE IT IF YOU WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON IN THIS ELECTION

Unbelievable – Facebook’s Lead Executive on Election Policy Was Vice-President Joe Biden’s Advisor to Ukraine…

Posted on October 17, 2020 by sundance

Hat Tip Fool Nelson – Put this in the stunning conflict of interest file that is truly jaw-dropping.  This is just unreal.

Anna Makanju is the Facebook executive in charge of “election integrity on the platform”; and guess what her job was before that position… “Previously, she was the special policy adviser for Europe and Eurasia to former US Vice President Joe Biden”. (citation)

[Source Link – (likely to soon disappear)]

That’s right folks, the Facebook executive currently blocking all of the negative evidence of Hunter and Joe Biden’s corrupt activity in Ukraine is the same person who was coordinating the corrupt activity between the Biden family payoffs and Ukraine.

You just cannot make this stuff up folks.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

The Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops (TCCB), the lobbying and administrative arm for the Texas episcopacy, albeit with no canonical authority, has sided with the Cook Childrens Medical Center hospital to euthanize baby Tinslee Lewis. The very church that prides herself on caring for the destitute and displaced has tightened ties to the pro-death medical lobby, smothering the disabled in that suffocating yoke.


Think Judges Don’t Impact YOUR Life? Think Again.  

The Supreme Court of Texas (SCOTX) delivered more time to Baby Tinslee Lewis, an ill 20-month-old in a Fort Worth hospital. Through a long legal battle, Cook Children’s Medical Center has sought to impose death on this baby since last November. Thus far, the courts have ruled in favor of Trinity, Tinslee’s mother, who is fighting for the life of her precious daughter.  

Cook Children’s asked SCOTX for permission to withdraw the toddler’s life-sustaining treatment while the 10-Day Rule is argued in court. SCOTX declined the petition, and Tinslee will continue to receive treatment. Judges matter…they matter to Trinity and to Baby Tinslee, and judges indeed impact the daily lives of people.

A single judge in Texas could have put a death sentence on Tinslee—without due process.Under the 10-Day Rule of the Texas Advance Directives Act (Section 166.046 of the Health and Safety Code), patients rendered futile face death by hospital committee—no trial, no second opinion, no due process. The death of the patient is hastened because the committee feels that his or her quality of life is too low

Baby Tinslee is almost two years old and struggles with a congenital heart condition. In November 2019, Cook Children’s Medical Center in Fort Worth moved to withdraw her treatment, including a ventilator, without which the young child would die. Baby Tinslee’s mother would not acquiesce to the hospital, so Cook invoked the statutory 10-day process to euthanize the child.

The first judge protected Baby Tinslee, but Cook has not relented, even though she is conscious and interactive when not sedated. Those moving to “end her [alleged] suffering” say she would not live long even with medical interventions. If that were so, why rush to kill her? If she or any other patient with a disability is actively dying, why hurry to withdraw treatment?Advocates for disability rights have been asking these questions for decades.

In late July, the Court of Appeals for the Second District of Texas held the Texas futility law likely unconstitutional, thereby further protecting Tinslee. Cook Children’s Medical Center still persisted, hoping for a reversal by SCOTX of the appellate court’s ruling before a trial on the constitutionality of the 10-Day Rule.  

Disability advocacy organizations Not Dead Yet, National ADAPT, ADAPT of Texas, Protect TX Fragile Kids, and the Autistic Self Advocacy Network joined an amicus brief to SCOTX for Baby Tinslee. The brief was filed on October 8 by Texas health care and civil rights attorney Michelle Hayes, a practicing Catholic from Notre Dame Law School (the same school from which Amy Coney Barrett earned her law degree). Other signers of the brief are:The Healthcare Advocacy and Leadership Organization (HALO), The Terri Schiavo Life and Hope Network, Deacon Keith Fournier (also a Catholic attorney), The True Texas Project, Right to Life of East Texas, The Common Good Foundation, and Grassroots America We the PeopleTwo Texas Catholic bishops who have consistently rebuked the 10-Day Rule also signed the brief: Most Reverend Joseph E. Strickland, Bishop of the Diocese of Tyler, and Most Reverend René H. Gracida, Bishop Emeritus of Corpus Christi. Bishop Gracida cited then-Pope John Paull II: “Every medical action must always have its object—intended by the moral agent—the promotion of life and never the pursuit of death.” Address to the Italian Catholic Doctors Association (28 December 1978): Insegnamenti di Giovanni Paolo II, 1 (1978), 438.

Predictably, the Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops (TCCB), the lobbying and administrative arm for the Texas episcopacy, albeit with no canonical authority, sided with the hospital to euthanize Tinslee. The very church that prides herself on caring for the destitute and displaced has tightened ties to the pro-death medical lobby, smothering the disabled in that suffocating yoke. However, the TCCB can no longer present a unified position in support of the 10-Day Rule with Bishops Strickland and Gracida publicly opposing the law and working to protect Baby Tinslee’s Right to Life.
 Catholic healthcare institutions constitute a concrete sign of the way in which the ecclesiastical community take care of the sick following the example of the Good Samaritan. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Letter “Samaritus bonus” on the care of persons in the critical and terminal phases of life (22 September 2020), n. 9. Baby Tinslee’s case now returns to the district court, which will consider these questions: Are the rights of Baby Tinslee being violated? Should a hospital have unilateral authority to withdraw life-sustaining medical treatment from a patient against the will of the patient/surrogate? Do patients have any due process rights in these situations? Is the 10-Day Rule of the Texas Advance Directives Act unconstitutional?
The date of the trial has not been set by the 48th District Court over which Judge Sandee Marion presides. Cook Children’s must continue treating Baby Tinslee throughout the waiting period and the trial.

Tinslee’s case spotlights judicial philosophy; in other words, the judge could rule according to a strict interpretation of the Constitution and due process rights, or she may grant rights to a hospital to decide who lives and dies. There are many possible outcomes, but whatever decision is issued, this judicial decision will impact EVERY hospitalized patient in Texas.

A single judge could decide if Baby Tinslee lives or dies.

Judges matter.
 
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

THE CORRUPTION OF THE BIDEN/CHINA RELATIONSHIP POSES A SERIOUS DANGER FOR THE United States SHOULD Joe Biden WIN THE ELECTION NEXT MONTH

← President Trump Make America Great Again Rally – Macon, GA – 7:00pm ET Livestream…Saturday October 17th – Open Thread →

Fox News Confirms Biden/China Payoff – Rudy Giuliani Talks to Lou Dobbs….

Posted on October 16, 2020 by sundance

In a breaking news story tonight, Fox News has confirmed with one of the Hunter Biden email recipients that the purpose of the content was setting up payments to Hunter Biden knowing the money would be funneled to his father, Joe Biden [SEE HERE]

In related news Rudy Giuliani appears on Fox News with Lou Dobbs to explain the content of the electronic files and the institutional blackout to keep the information hidden:https://www.youtube.com/embed/Cc3wf8wsWaU?version=3&rel=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&fs=1&hl=en&autohide=2&wmode=transparent

(Via Fox News) One of the people on an explosive email thread allegedly involving Hunter Biden has corroborated the veracity of the messages, which appear to outline a payout for former Vice President Joe Biden as part of a deal with a Chinese energy firm.

One email, dated May 13, 2017, and obtained by Fox News, includes a discussion of “remuneration packages” for six people in a business deal with a Chinese energy firm. The email appeared to identify Hunter Biden as “Chair / Vice Chair depending on agreement with CEFC,” in an apparent reference to now-bankrupt CEFC China Energy Co.

The email includes a note that “Hunter has some office expectations he will elaborate.” A proposed equity split references “20” for “H” and “10 held by H for the big guy?” with no further details. Fox News spoke to one of the people who was copied on the email, who confirmed its authenticity.

Sources told Fox News that “the big guy” is a reference to the former vice president. The New York Post initially published the emails and other controversial messages that Fox News has also obtained. (read more)

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

YOU MUST WATCH THE 30 TOP BLOOPERS OF SLEEPY Joe Biden

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment