Protect and enrich.” This is a perfect encapsulation of the Clinton Foundation (TWO GAMER LAWYERS - OWNED BY GEORGE SOROS) (WHAT ABOUT THE CHINA BIDEN PENN CENTER?) and the Obama (TWO GAMER LAWYERS - OWNED BY GEORGE SOROS) book and television deals. Then there is the Biden family (FOUR GAMER LAWYERS - Joe, Hunter, James, Frank - OWNED BY GEORGE SOROS AND LARRY FINK OF BLACKROCK) corruption, followed closely behind by similar abuses of power and office by the Warren (DOCUMENTED LYING 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 (ALSO OWNED BY GEORGE SOROS) AND HER LAWYER HUSBAND AND THE BANKSTERS’ RENT BOY, (GAMER LAWYER) CHUCK SCHUMER, OWNED BY LARRY FINK OF BLACKROCK WHO OWNS A BIG PIECE OF THE ‘BIG GUY’ JOE, AND GEORGE SOROS’ RENT BOY (GAMER LAWYER) TONY BLINKEN, AS WELL AS CON MAN (GAMER LAWYER) ADAM SHIFF AND HIS CORRUPTNESS (GAMER LAWYER) BOB MENENDEZ STILL EVADING PRISON. TOSS INTO THE DUNG HEAP (GAMER LAWYER ) ERIC SALWELL, A CHINESE HO AND SPY CHASER AND DEFUCT FORMER GOV OF NEW YORK, PREDATORY (GAMER LAWYER) ANDREW CUOMO, A DOCUMENTED COVID LIAR.
BRIAN C JOONDEPH
Obama-Biden Administration Was Creeping Fascism
The similarities between the Obama administration and Italian fascism have been pointed out many times. Over a dozen articles about this are on this site alone (1, 2, 3, 4). It is usually said that fascism is a strain of socialism in which the means of production are beneficially owned by private persons but controlled by the government.
Both the Obama administration and Mussolini used a financial crisis to take over banks and industry. Mussolini openly assumed complete control of them, even though partial private ownership was allowed to remain. The U.S. government bailed out banks and the auto industry in 2008, before Obama was inaugurated. It did not own the banks, but the bailout created public sentiment in favor of government control of the banks and more regulation of all businesses. Obama used this sentiment to its full extent. Elizabeth Warren led the creation of the partisan Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which wielded unprecedented powers and was unaccountable to Congress. By 2016, the corporate world was already subverted and controlled by the Democrat administration. For example, all banks refused to deal with Donald Trump in 2016. The democrat-controlled media misrepresented the cause of this discrimination. Warren’s Consumer Financial Protection Bureau effectively allowed the ruling administration to strangle its opposition financially.
Citizens United v. FEC, decided by the Supreme Court in January 2010, very likely radicalized Democrats even further into total fascism. The Supreme Court confirmed that private corporations have the First Amendment right to use their money to support political candidates; Democrats concluded that they would have to control corporations to win elections.
Starting in 2010, the Obama administration viciously targeted any effective opposition, including the Tea Party movement, which was obliterated. The IRS was most notorious for targeting Tea Party organizations, but the DOJ (Eric Holder) and the FBI (Robert Mueller) also participated. What do we call regimes that destroy non-violent opposition movements?
A few months before the 2012 elections, Obama’s DOJ sued Gallup for hinting that the government had manipulated unemployment numbers. Additionally, Obama’s DOJ sued Standard & Poor’s for $5 billion for downgrading the federal debt, Treasurys. As a result, nobody challenges the false current inflation numbers, and the credit rating agencies do not dare downgrade the Treasurys below their current AA+/AAA rating.
The Obama administration also waged and eventually won the war on Fox News. It also chilled media criticism of Obama and the administration’s agenda. The DOJ and FBI (Robert Mueller and James Comey) criminally prosecuted and imprisoned filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza and lied about the initiation and predication of that investigation. (D’Souza had produced a film criticizing and mocking Obama.)
Similarly, climate scientists who opposed the administration's climate dogma were defunded and silenced. Then, the Obama administration intimidated businesses into not donating to nonprofits linked to climate dissent, essentially stifling corporate donations to almost all right-of-center think tanks.
Much of this information was not known during the Obama administration, and most of the public missed it. How could this happen? Where was the media—the self-appointed guard dog of democracy? In the beginning, the mainstream media was enamored with Obama. By the time it realized the severity of Obama’s abuses of power, it was no longer able to mount any opposition.
How did this happen? The Obama administration started by hand-picking tech corporations, who then quickly and consequently became what we now call “Big Tech.” Combined with other measures, this effectively gave the administration control over the flow of information, including the news.
As newspapers, journals, and magazines transitioned to the Internet, Google and Microsoft took authors’ copyrighted content without compensation and offered access to it through their search engines. Improvements in Google’s search engine meant exploiting other people’s work more efficiently.
The Obama administration failed to enforce copyright laws on written works, in violation of Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution which reads:
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries[.]
By 2009, the news media was able to connect its financial difficulties to Google. Rupert Murdoch attempted to work out a compromise with Big Tech, but the administration waged war on him.
Instead of enforcing copyright laws, the Democrats arranged for Big Tech, specifically Google, to pay only selected outlets, such as The New York Times. This resulted in the media becoming entirely dependent on the Big Tech corporations Obama chose. The administration also signed special agreements with these Big Tech corporations and patronized them with thousands of government accounts, effectively eliminating all other competitors.
Democrats also disregarded the second part of the above clause regarding Inventors and Discoveries. The seemingly bipartisan “America Invents Act”, passed under intense lobbying by Big Tech, made most patents unenforceable retroactively. Although there was a legitimate controversy about software patents, the leading cause for this reform was that the tech companies picked by the Obama administration were young and entirely based on inventions made by others. For example, Facebook was founded in 2004, after inventions that led to the creation of the interactive web had already been made. So, for Big Tech to not pay royalties or give credit to the original inventors, the government re-distributed wealth from the pioneers of the Internet to the multi-billion dollar corporations of its choice.
Obamanet was another major strike against freedom, forcing all publishers and authors to go through Google and other internet gatekeepers.
Thus, the opposition press was muzzled and driven almost to extinction without the public noticing. The Big Tech winners, cherry-picked by the Obama administration, became the administration’s most enthusiastic supporters. In addition to its monopoly of information, Big Tech also provided Democrats troves of private data and the capacity for mass surveillance and economic marginalization of dissenters. By 2013, Twitter was suspending accounts criticizing Obamacare.
Trump’s victory in 2016 came as a shock for Democrats who thought they had a firm grip on both the corporations and the media. It was as if Mussolini decided to allow sham elections and suddenly lost them. While Obama expected to quit after his two terms, the corporations who had developed this symbiotic relationship with the ruling Democrat party needed it to remain in power. Together with young and hungry Democrat operatives, they launched the resistance.
In 2016, the Democrat government apparatus, which had destroyed the Tea Party, jailed Dinesh D’Souza, hounded dissenting voices from Fox News to the Associated Press (some articles), and had now set its sights on Donald Trump. In hindsight, this was predictable.
In 2021, Biden confirmed what many had suspected — Democrats wanted the Republican party as a controlled opposition. In January 2021, Biden was telling the public what the Republican party should be. By March 2021, Biden was already saying that he is not sure whether there will be a Republican party in 2024.
Obamaism and Italian fascism have more in common than ideological similarities. Before WWI, Mussolini was a non-fascist socialist; socialists were anti-war. What turned Mussolini against anti-war socialism was Marx’s observation that wars are followed by revolutions. If wars cause revolutions, let’s join the war! Notice how easy this switch was?
Image generated by AI.
Back in 2020, Joe Biden addressed concerns that he would be the oldest president in history. "Look," he said, "I view myself as a bridge, not as anything else." Four years later, as Biden delivered his election year State of the Union address, I found myself pondering where, exactly, Biden's bridge leads.
Not to a younger, spryer, less compromised Democratic nominee in 2024, it would seem. Biden is convinced that he is the only candidate who can beat Donald Trump. Barring a health emergency, he will be on the ballot in November—despite majorities in his own party and supermajorities among all Americans telling pollsters that he is too old for another term. The country is faced with a choice that it does not want, between two candidates it views unfavorably.
Biden's bridge doesn't connect to a healthier politics. The State of the Union illuminated the stark divide between Democrats and Republicans. I can't recall a more partisan State of the Union address, nor a State of the Union where the president's predecessor was invoked so frequently. Biden painted Republicans as unserious about the border, as radicals on abortion and IVF, as threats to American democracy, and as useful idiots for Vladimir Putin. Today's Republicans do not stand idly by when attacked, and they responded in the tetchy and feisty way to which we have become accustomed. No one who listened to the State of the Union can believe that the general election will be any less vitriolic and inflammatory than 2020 or 2016.
Nor will Biden's bridge carry us to a safer world. Since Biden took office, America has retreated in disgrace from Afghanistan, desultorily assisted Ukraine resist Russia's invasion, and watched in horror as Hamas murdered, raped, and kidnapped Israelis—including American citizens. Under Biden, America has behaved ambivalently as the Middle East descended into regional war, and watched China, North Korea, and now Haiti with worried eyes. Inflation and neglect have eroded America's defense industrial base just as Russia and China ramp up defense spending. Millions of illegal immigrants have crossed the southern border, including individuals on the FBI terror watch list and hardened criminals. Terrible crimes like the murder of Laken Riley have put illegal immigration top of mind for voters.
Rather than bridge the gap between the Silent Generation and the Millennial Generation, between one Democratic Party and another, between a nation rocked by the early decades of the 21st century and a more hopeful future, Joe Biden has left the country at an impasse. Americans doubt his capacities and say his policies have hurt not helped them. They do not believe in "America's comeback" and, if they do sense improvement in their lives, do not credit Biden for it. Consequently, Biden has the worst job approval of an incumbent president since Jimmy Carter and is running behind Donald Trump in national and swing state polls.
The DNC speech that the president called a State of the Union address won't change things. Biden may have talked more rapidly and more loudly than usual, but he did not say anything new. He bragged about lower inflation, but hardly dwelled on higher prices and interest rates. His most original policy initiative was his call for the U.S. military to "lead an emergency mission to establish a temporary pier in the Mediterranean on the Gaza coast that can receive large ships carrying food, water, medicine, and temporary shelters."
This is insane. I would like to have been a fly on the wall when the Gaza pier found its way onto the whiteboard. Who will be on the receiving end of the pier? What will they do with the aid? How will we know that the food and fuel won't be stolen by or funneled to a terrorist army with genocidal aims? A terrorist army that killed 34 Americans and are holding 6 Americans hostage? Did anyone ask these questions? Or did they ask Google Gemini to design their Mideast policy?
The passage on Israel and Hamas revealed the true purpose of this year's State of the Union. Biden's emphasis on aid to the Palestinians in Gaza, and on pressuring Israel to conduct a just war according to an impossible double standard, was a panicked response to divisions on his left. Indeed, the whole speech was a panicked response to divisions on his left. The Biden high campaign must believe that its problem is the Democratic base—and that the way to boost turnout among the Democratic base is through progressive messaging.
I have no doubt that Democrats will be pleased with the result. But I am also skeptical it will persuade independents and working-class men and women of all races that Biden has the answers to America's problems. And if something doesn't change for Biden soon, he will be the bridge from one Trump term to another.
No comments:
Post a Comment