Friday, July 21, 2023

THE BIDEN REGIME - PULLING THE WAGONS AROUND THE MOST CORRUPT PRESIDENT IN MODERN AMERICAN HISTORY - Report: Joe Biden Uses Shorter Air Force One Staircase to Hide Mobility Problems

 

Report: Joe Biden Uses Shorter Air Force One Staircase to Hide Mobility Problems

President Joe Biden walks up the steps of Air Force One at Andrews Air Force Base, Md., Thursday, July 20, 2023. Biden is traveling to Philadelphia to court unions as a cornerstone of the country's economic future with a speech at a Philadelphia shipyard. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)
AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta

President Joe Biden now uses the shorter steps to board Air Force One instead of the usual staircase that he often trips upon while boarding the plane, Politico reported Thursday in a 19-paragraph article.

Politico, which frequently tries to protect the Bidens from political liabilities, such as its infamous reporting on the “laptop from hell” in 2020, permitted reporters Eli Stokols and Jonathan Lemire to write an article on Thursday about  Biden’s deteriorating physical well being.

“Biden downplays age talk — but subtle accommodations are being made,” the headline read with the subtitle, “From the dinners declined, to the way he boards Air Force One and the shoes he wears, Biden’s routines are changing.”

The article highlighted his growing physical infirmities and his new use of the smaller steps at the back of Air Force One to board the plane:

Biden boarded [Air Force One] using the shorter set of retractable stairs that fold into the belly of the plane. The routine began a few months ago, the president increasingly avoiding the grander, more traditional doorway near the front of the aircraft on the main passenger level, higher above the tarmac.

Last week, Biden used the small steps to board Air Force One for every flight on his European trip: to London, Vilnius, Helsinki and back to Washington. None of those arrivals or departures — all of which are public and witnessed by the traveling press pool — were marked by inclement weather. He used the large stairs to descend from the plane upon arrival in London, Vilnius and Helsinki, when his hosts arranged more formal greeting ceremonies, but not to climb back aboard. And the overseas trip came on the heels of several recent domestic ones where Biden predominantly used the lower stairs on visits to and from Rocky Mount, N.C., Chicago, San Francisco and Philadelphia.

The new routine looks to be another subtle accommodation to the president’s age. It is hiding in plain sight, although the White House won’t concede that interpretation. Three weeks ago when the president traveled to New York, again using the lower stairs to board, Bloomberg’s Justin Sink pressed press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre about it during her in-flight gaggle. Was Biden having “mobility problems,” Sink asked, or was it “to address — you know, he’s had a couple incidents falling on the stairs getting up and you guys just decided that it would be better for him?”

In February, Biden took a physical examination that found he suffers from a stiff gait and neuropathy in the feet. According to the Cleveland Clinic, “Neuropathy refers to any condition that affects the nerves outside your brain or spinal cord.”

Biden’s neuropathy might explain why he often trips:

According to recent polling, strong majorities of Americans believe Biden is too old for another term as commander-in-chief and hold concerns about his “health and mental acuity.” A plurality of U.S. adults believes his age and health “severely” limit his ability to do his job.

President Joe Biden is helped up after falling during the graduation ceremony at the United States Air Force Academy on June 1, 2023 (BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images).

Nearly half of independent voters say the 80-year-old’s health and age “severely limit” his ability to discharge his duties even as he readies to run again in 2024.

Follow Wendell Husebø on Twitter @WendellHusebø. He is the author of Politics of Slave Morality.

Democrats Try to Cheat Their Way to Retaking the House

A plan to ram through gerrymandered redistricting maps in New York.

[Editor’s note: Make sure to read Joseph Klein’s masterpiece contributions in Jamie Glazov’s new book: Barack Obama’s True Legacy: How He Transformed America.]

In order to take back control of the House of Representatives, the Democrats are eyeing several seats in New York that flipped to the Republicans in the 2022 midterm election cycle. Winning these seats was critical in securing the House majority for the Republicans. Now the Democrats want the seats back. But they are not content with simply taking their message to the voters and competing for their votes on the issues. Instead, the Democrats are trying to cheat their way to victory.

With the full support of the national House Democratic leadership, New York State Democrats are seeking a do-over of what is supposed to be a once-in-a-decade redistricting process based on the results of the most recent U.S. census. Last year the New York State Court of Appeals had ordered the drawing of competitive districts by a neutral court-appointed expert in advance of the 2022 midterm elections. The purpose was to replace the Democrat-controlled New York State Legislature’s flagrantly gerrymandered district maps that violated a New York State constitutional amendment adopted by the voters outlawing partisan gerrymandering. The Legislature had seized control of the redistricting process and corrupted it after the bipartisan Independent Redistricting Commission established by the constitutional amendment was deadlocked, leading to intervention by the Court of Appeals. Now the Democrats are trying to seize control of the redistricting process again to thwart fair congressional elections in 2024.

In a lawsuit funded by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Democrats are seeking to throw out the competitive districts that were drawn by order of the New York State Court of Appeals. The Democrats’ justification for their outrageous gambit is that these competitive districts were only valid for the 2022 elections and that the bipartisan commission needs to go back to work to redraw the districts for the remainder of the decade.

Never mind that the Court of Appeals did not indicate in its decision that its intent was only to order a limited, one-time temporary fix. In the absence of such an explicit statement of intent, the presumption should be that last year’s court-ordered congressional district maps are final and in place until after the 2030 census. The New York Constitution states:

“The process for redistricting congressional and state legislative districts established by this section and sections five and five-b of this article shall govern redistricting in this state except to the extent that a court is required to order the adoption of, or changes to, a redistricting plan as a remedy for a violation of law. A reapportionment plan and the districts contained in such plan shall be in force until the effective date of a plan based upon the subsequent federal decennial census taken in a year ending in zero unless modified pursuant to court order.” (NY Const, Art. III, § 4 [e])

The only modifications that the Court of Appeals ordered last year were to the unconstitutional maps that the Legislature drew up in its effort to rig the system. It makes no sense that the Court of Appeals contemplated giving the New York Legislature the opportunity so soon to manipulate the redistricting process again in advance of the 2024 elections.

The National Republican Campaign Committee correctly called the Democrats’ legal challenge “a blatant partisan power grab thinly disguised as a court case.” However, the Democrats’ cynical ploy is working so far. An intermediate appellate New York court, the Appellate Division of the of the State Supreme Court in Albany, agreed with the Democrats’ position. Its July 13th decision concluded that the Court of Appeals’ order last year applied only to the 2022 elections as a temporary fix to a procedural problem caused by the Independent Redistricting Commission’s failure to complete its work properly. The Appellate Division court majority found that the commission erred in not  submitting a second set of redistricting maps to the Legislature after the first set went nowhere. The Appellate Division court ordered that the commission restart the redistricting process to correct this error.

Counting on the likelihood that the commission will once again be deadlocked, Democrats are salivating at the prospect that the Democrat-dominated New York State Legislature will again ultimately take over and manipulate the redistricting process to their partisan advantage.

Republicans have vowed to appeal the Appellate Division’s decision to the New York State Court of Appeals. But they are likely to have an uphill battle since the composition of New York’s highest court has moved decidedly to the left since 2022. Judge Rowan D. Wilson, a liberal, dissented from the Court of Appeals’ 2022 decision. In 2023, he replaced the prior chief judge who resigned a few months after writing the majority decision concluding that Democratic legislative leaders had created gerrymandered congressional district maps in violation of the New York State Constitution. Liberal Caitlin Halligan in turn was confirmed to fill the vacancy left by Judge Wilson’s promotion from associate judge to chief judge, creating a 4-3 liberal majority on the Court of Appeals.

With these changes, the risk to fair congressional elections in New York next year is that today’s more progressive Court of Appeals will reverse the 2022 decision by what was then a more centrist Court of Appeals that mandated competitively drawn congressional districts. The Democrats could well win via litigation before a receptive court what they fear they cannot win legitimately at the ballot box in fair elections.

Avatar photo

Joseph Klein

Joseph Klein is a Harvard-trained lawyer, and the author of Global Deception: The UN’s Stealth Assault on America’s Freedom and Lethal Engagement: Barack Hussein Obama, The United Nations & Radical Islam.

Reader Interactions

Biden’s War on Social Media Posts

A president's hatred of the First Amendment.

To remind you of what the First Amendment is:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

I feel this is important to bring up, because now, more than ever, our right to free speech comes under attack. Particularly from a higher-up position.

I’m talking about President Joe Biden. Yes, the same president that was pushing for the longest time to take care of the people that voted him into office. Apparently he’s not too fond about what some people are saying about him on social media.

The Epoch Times recently reported that a federal judge has granted a partial injunction that prevents Biden administration officials and government agencies (including the FBI and the Justice Department) from working alongside big tech firms to censor accounts or posts on social media.

This follows a censorship-by-proxy lawsuit that was brought on by two Attorney Generals in Louisiana and Missouri, who noted that Biden administration officials and agencies were actually pressuring social media companies to not only remove posts, but also suspend particular accounts.

As a result, these agencies cannot engage “in any communication of any kind with social-media companies urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner for removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech,” per the official injunction.

“This could be arguably one of the most important First Amendment cases in modern history,” Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry told The Epoch Times following the injunction.

“If you look at the opinion that the judge lays out, he takes from our argument that this is basically one of the most massive undertakings of the federal government to limit American speech in the history of our country. The things that we uncovered, in this case, should be both shocking, appalling, and concerning for all Americans.”

But the real question is why. Why would Biden and his administration go to great lengths to silence certain accounts and social media posts? I’ve got two guesses.

First, and probably foremost, is when he went on the attack against “MAGA republicans” back in September. He noted how these people “threaten our very democracy,” with so many taking to social media to post their thoughts on him and other political matters.

This might be a bit far-fetched, but think about it. Biden has deep disdain for anyone that supports former President Donald Trump or, for that matter, these “MAGA Republicans” he’s discussing. So of course he’d go after them on social media, in the hopes of keeping things “justified” – for his own sake, of course.

A president going after people for their freedom of speech is absolutely unheard of. Especially when you have the First Amendment into consideration. He has to know they’re protected by that, yes?

Then there’s the second guess, and this one’s more personal – Hunter Biden.

As you know, the president’s son has once again landed in legal hot water, particularly with documents indicating that Hunter tried to use his father’s own leverage to pressure a Chinese executive. Now, ol’ Joe has denied ever being there, but that hasn’t stopped many from taking to social media to provide their two cents on the matter.

Come to think of it, that’s even worse than going after “MAGA Republicans” in general, if only because that means the President is trying to cover up theories surrounding his son instead of letting him have his day in court. That means he’s working against the First Amendment for the sake of his own family.

We don’t know what the real reason is for the Biden administration going on an attack such as this. But I’m thankful that the federal judge working the case realizes the importance of free speech. It may not be what Biden and his family are hoping to hear, but it’s our God-given right and no one – not even the president – should be allowed to silence it. Period.

Michael Letts is the Founder, President, and CEO of InVest USA, a national grassroots non-profit organization that is helping hundreds of communities provide thousands of bulletproof vests for their police forces through educational, public relations, sponsorship, and fundraising programs. He also has over 30 years of law enforcement experience under his belt, hence his pro-police stance for his brothers and sisters in blue.

Reader Interactions

T THE CORE OF ALL OF AMERICA'S PROBLEMS IS A PACK OF PIG PARASITE LAWYERS!

CUT AND PASTE YOUTUBE LINKS

 

Richard Wolff | ELITES BLEED the MASSES DRY.... you mean like a pack of parasite lawyers???

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g7RuxYiSPc&t=2s

 

Full Text: Breitbart’s Emma-Jo Morris’s Opening Statement to Congress About Censorship of Hunter Biden Laptop

House Committee on the Judiciary / YouTube
0 seconds of 5 minutes, 39 secondsVolume 90%

Breitbart News Politics Editor Emma-Jo Morris denounced the “elaborate censorship conspiracy” to silence her 2020 reporting on Hunter Biden’s laptop during testimony before the House Weaponization Committee on Thursday.

The following is the full text of Morris’ opening statement before the House Committee:

My name is Emma-Jo Morris. I am the Politics Editor at Breitbart News.

I am here today because I published a series of news stories three years ago, in October 2020, about Hunter Biden’s now infamous laptop — also known as the “laptop from hell” — which is seen as some of the most scandalous reporting of the last decade.

What was more scandalous than the reporting itself though was the fact that it exposed the unholy alliance between the Intelligence Community, social media platforms, and legacy media outlets.

At the time, I was deputy politics editor at the New York Post. My reporting showed that, despite then-candidate Joe Biden’s repeated and furious denials, he was apparently involved in the foreign business deals of his family.

Over several days, just weeks before Americans would vote for their next president, I revealed verified authentic emails from the Biden scion’s hard drive showing Ukrainian business partners receiving leaks from the Obama White House, I documented an off-the-books meeting between then-Vice President Biden and a Ukrainian energy executive, and introduced the world to “the Big Guy,” who got action on a deal with CEFC China Energy Co.

The Post published exactly how the material for the reporting was obtained, even identifying the sources, as well as a federal subpoena showing the FBI was in possession of the material the story was based on, and had been since December of 2019.­­­

But when the stories appeared on social media that morning — the venue where millions of Americans go to find their news, and editors to get their angles — within hours, the reporting was censored on all major platforms, on the basis of being called “hacked” or “Russian disinformation.”

Twitter refused to allow users to share the link to the stories, banned the links from being shared in private messages — a policy typically used to clamp down on child porn distribution — and locked the Post out of its verified account.

Facebook said it would curb distribution and reach of the links on its platform.

(AP Photo/Andrew Harnik; NY Post; BNN)

However, the stories were not based on “hacked materials,” nor were they “Russian disinformation.” And despite those claims appearing to come out of thin air at the time, we would eventually learn that they actually didn’t come out of thin air at all.

On October 19, five days after the Post first began publishing, Politico ran a story headlined, “Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say.”

Politico printed a letter, completely uncritically, from veteran members of U.S. intelligence falsely claiming the Post exposé “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”

Most notable among the signatories of the letter were Jim Clapper, former DNI, and John Brennan, former CIA — despite having such damaged credibility following their participation in the Russia Collusion conspiracy theory.

A few days later, on October 22, when Biden appeared in the second presidential debate, and was confronted with the facts of the Post’s reporting, he said to Trump, “Fifty former national intelligence professionals said this: what he’s accusing me of is a Russian plot.”

But it was not.

Now, fast forward to this year, three years later.

Just last spring, House investigators revealed it was a call by now-Secretary of State Antony Blinken to Former Acting CIA Director Michael Morell that prompted the spy letter published by Politico, which bypassed agency approval processes that would have been normally applied.

It is also now known that ahead of my reporting, federal agencies were priming social media companies to execute an operation to discredit it.

According to internal documents released by Elon Musk upon his acquisition of Twitter, the FBI and other intelligence community members essentially directed the platform’s censorship operation in part externally, by working with top management; in part internally, by social media companies hiring eye-popping numbers of agency-alumni.

Journalist Michael Shellenberger reported, based on documents he obtained from Musk, that “during all of 2020, the FBI and other law enforcement agencies repeatedly primed” Twitter executives “to dismiss reports of Hunter Biden’s laptop as a Russian ‘hack and leak’ operation.” Feds arranged for Top Secret security clearances to be granted to Twitter management, and even had an encrypted messaging network set up, which they dubbed a “virtual war room.”

To this day, hundreds of people from the intelligence community work at social media companies.

Over the last few years, my reporting has been confirmed by virtually every mainstream news outlet, from the Washington Post, to the New York Times, to Politico. No one denies that the laptop is real, that the origin story is exactly what I told you it was in the first place.

This elaborate censorship conspiracy wasn’t because the information being reported on was false. It was because the information was true, and a threat to the power centers in this country.

What this relationship between U.S. government officials and American corporations represents is an unprecedented push to undermine the First Amendment — the right to think, write, read, and say whatever we want — and how we respond will determine whether we see a free press as inalienable, or as optional.

Watch Live: Breitbart’s Emma-Jo Morris, RFK Jr. Testify on Govt, Big Tech Censorship

The Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government will hear testimony Thursday, July 20, on censorship of Americans by the government and Big Tech.

“The hearing will examine the federal government’s role in censoring Americans, the Missouri v. Biden case, and Big Tech’s collusion with out-of-control government agencies to silence speech,” the subcommittee announced.

Breitbart News’s Emma-Jo Morris will testify to the censorship of her reporting on the contents of Hunter Biden’s “Laptop from Hell” shortly before the 2020 presidential election:

Over the last few years, my reporting has been confirmed by virtually every mainstream news outlet, from the Washington Post, to the New York Times, to Politico. No one denies that the laptop is real, that the origin story is exactly what I told you it was in the first place.

This elaborate censorship conspiracy wasn’t because the information being reported on was false. It was because the information was true, and a threat to the power centers in this country.

What this relationship between U.S,government officials and American corporations represents is an unprecedented push to undermine the First Amendment — the right to think, write, read, and say whatever we want — and how we respond will determine whether we see a free press as inalienable, or as optional.

Multiple media outlets, including the New York TimesCNN, the Washington Post, and CBS admitted they had independently confirmed the veracity of the Hunter Biden laptop well after the conclusion of the 2020 presidential election. A 2022 TIPP poll reported 71% of Americans believe had the story not been suppressed, it would have changed the result of the election between Donald Trump and Joe Biden.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who is challenging Joe Biden for the Democrat nomination for president in 2024, and Louisiana Department of Justice Special Assistant Attorney General D. John Sauer will also testify at Thursday’s hearing.

WATCH: Democrats Try to Censor the Censorship Hearing
House Committee on the Judiciary
0 seconds of 4 minutes, 4 secondsVolume 90%

Democrats tried to censor one of their own, presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., after his passionate opening statement on Thursday at a hearing on censorship at the House Weaponization Subcommittee.

Kennedy had just defended his record on racism and antisemitism, disputing claims by 102 Democrats in a letter that he had allegedly “spread vile and dangerous antisemitic and anti-Asian conspiracy theories.”

He said that his remarks had been taken out of context, and noted his strong support for Israel. Waving the Democrats’ letter, “I know many of the people who wrote this letter. I don’t believe there’s a single person who signed this letter who believes I’m antisemitic. I do not believe that. There’s no evidence of that.”

He noted that he had been censored on social media platforms — not just on the topic of vaccines, but on ordinary issues.

House Committee on the Judiciary
0 seconds of 10 minutes, 20 secondsVolume 90%

Following his remarks, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), who had used an earlier hearing to attack the practice of professional journalism itself, moved that the hearing be moved into “executive session,” ending the public testimony. She cited rule 11, section 2, of the House, which provides for an executive session if testimony “would tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate any person.” Republicans moved to table the motion.

Democrats then demanded a roll call vote, and used their votes to deliver short speeches, with Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA) calling the committee, without irony, a “Soviet politburo,” as he voted to censor Kennedy.

“This is a hearing on censorship that began with an effort .. to censor Mr. Kennedy!” Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) later exclaimed.

As the hearing continued, Democrats attacked Kennedy, with the minority party ranking member, Delegate Stacey Plaskett (D-VI), accusing him of trying “to target the black community” with vaccine misinformation.

Breitbart News’ own political editor, Emma-Jo Morris, testified at the hearing about the censorship of her reporting on Hunter Biden’s laptop:

House Committee on the Judiciary / YouTube
0 seconds of 5 minutes, 39 secondsVolume 90%

Democrats tried to dispute whether the FBI had verified the authenticity of the laptop at the time of her reporting, when the agency had reached out to Twitter and to other social media platforms to warn them that such stories could be Russian disinformation (which it was not).

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). He is the author of the recent e-book, Neither Free nor Fair: The 2020 U.S. Presidential Election. His recent book, RED NOVEMBER, tells the story of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary from a conservative perspective. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

Photo: file

Dem Stacey Plaskett Defends Censorship: ‘Free Speech Is Not an Absolute’

Stacey Plaskett (Jim Watson / AFP / Getty)
Jim Watson / AFP / Getty

Delegate Stacey Plaskett (D-VI) defended censorship on Thursday, arguing that certain views should not enjoy the free speech protections of the First Amendment, which she said was limited by the Supreme Court.

Plaskett, the ranking member of the minority on the House Weaponization Subcommittee, attacked the alleged views of one of the witnesses, Democratic Party presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, calling them hateful.

“This is not the free speech that I know of,” she said. She recalled a recent controversy over remarks Kennedy made about the coronavirus affecting some population groups more than others, among other past comments.

Plaskett continued: “Free speech is not an absolute. The Supreme Court has stated that.” (The Court has not restricted the content of speech, but a “time, place, and manner” exceptions for the way speech is expressed.)

The ranking member went on to claim that Republicans had not invited Kennedy to testify because he had been censored on social media, but rather to associate themselves with his controversial views. She also claimed that past witnesses interviewed by the committee, such as would-be “disinformation czar” Nina Jancowicz, had been subjected to death threats, and implied that committee chair Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) supported those threats.

Republicans were not interested in defending free speech, Plaskett said. Rather, their goal was to force social media companies to promote “any conspiracy theories, no matter how harmful.”

She added: “They want to force social media companies to promote conspiracy theories because they think that’s the only way their candidate can win the 2020 [sic] election.” She said that Congress should be focused instead on issues like inflation.

In response, Kennedy devoted his opening statement to defending his record and noting that he had also been censored for talking about ordinary subjects. The purpose of free speech, he noted, was to protect speech that people did not agree with.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). He is the author of the recent e-book, Neither Free nor Fair: The 2020 U.S. Presidential Election. His recent book, RED NOVEMBER, tells the story of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary from a conservative perspective. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

The Worst President in the Last 100 Years" - Victor Davis Hanson

Victor Davis Hanson Questions Obama's Political Past

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXlx5mL0N7E

 

Chris Hedges on THE END Of America...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygM7JrLCDzU

 

The Biden Crime Family Comes Undone

Say it ain’t so, Joe.

Daniel Greenfield

https://www.frontpagemag.com/biden-crime-family-comes-undone-daniel-greenfield/

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

The Biden family is notorious for being the crookedest clan not only in Delaware, but in D.C.

 THERE IS A COMMONALITY AMONG THESE PEOPLE:

1.) THEY'RE GAMER LAWYERS.

2.) THEY HAVE A LONG DOCUMENTED HISTORY OF LYING TO THE AMERICA PEOPLE

3.) THEY ARE FAVORED AND FUNDED BY THE BIGGEST CRIMINALS ON WALL STREET.

4.) THEY ARE ALL BANKSTER BRIBES SUCKERS. MOST HAVE MADE FORTUNES SUCKING BANKSTER FEES IN THE FORM OF 'SPEECH FEE' BRIBES.

5.) MOST ARE SERVANTS OF THE BILLIONAIRE CLASS, AND IN PARTICULAR, GEORGE SOROS.

6.) ALL ARE DEDICATED TO PROTECTING THE HIGH TECH BILLIONAIRE CLASS WHO WANT NO CAPS ON IMPORTING 'CHEAP' LABOR. NEARLY 80% OF SILICON VALLEY TECH WORKERS ARE FOREIGN BORN.

7.) ALL STAGE THEMSELVES AS 'POPULIST' BUT IN REALITY ARE CLOSET REPUBLICANS.

8.) ALL ARE DEDICATED TO N.A.F.T.A AS DEMANDED BY THEIR CORPORATE PAYMASTERS. N.A.F.T.A WAS WRITTEN BY GAMER LAWYER PRESIDENT BILLARY CLINTON AND THEN SEN. 'CREDIT CARD' JOE BIDEN. WE KNOW WHAT GAMER LAWYER JOE BIDEN HAS DONE TO WHAT WAS LEFT OF AMERICA.

9.) ALL HAVE BEE ACCUSED OF BEING SOCIOPATHS, AS ARE MOST LAWYERS.

10). BEING GAMER  LAWYERS, THEY ARE A PROTECTED WHITE COLLAR CRIMINALS WHO POCKET THE LOOT THEY STEAL AND LAUGH AT THE REST OF US FOR BEING SO FUKING STUPID AS TO HAVE LET THEM RUN THE COUNTRY.... INTO THE GROUND AS THEY FILLED THEIR POCKETS.

HOW MANY OF THESE PIGS ARE GAMER LAWYERS ON THE TAKE?

 “Protect and enrich.” This is a perfect encapsulation of the Clinton Foundation  (TWO GAMER LAWYERS) (WHAT ABOUT THE CHINA BIDEN PENN CENTER?)  and the Obama (TWO GAMER LAWYERS) book and television deals. Then there is the Biden family (FOUR GAMER LAWYERS - JOE, HUNTER, JAMES, FRANK) corruption, followed closely behind by similar abuses of power and office by the Warren (GAMER LAWYER) and Sanders families, as Peter Schweizer described in his recent book “Profiles in Corruption.” These names just scratch the surface of government corruption (ADD GAMER LAWYER KAMALA HARRIS AND HER LAWYER HUSBAND AND THE BANKSTERS’ RENT BOY, LAWYER CHUCK SCHUMER AND GEORGE SOROS’ RENT BOY GAMER LAWER TONY BLINKEN AS WELL AS CON MAN ADAM SHIFF).    BRIAN C JOONDEPH

 

No comments: