DOES AMERICA REALLY HAVE FREE SPEECH?
IS THE CIA ONE MORE PROTECTION AGENCY FOR THE BIDEN CRIME FAMILY?
Jesse Watters : AMAZINGLY, this is Happening
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2-Bjq0N4J4
Shellenberger exposes Obama's CIA
Independent journalist Michael Shellenberger has broken a story on Substack this week exposing Barack Obama’s CIA both before and after the 2016 election:
1. Lying about Trump and Russia and Clinton (Hillary was actually Russia’s preference, but the CIA manipulated their own intelligence findings to stand the real conclusions on their heads and point to Trump as the Russian preference; and
2. Using international intelligence networks dominated by the U.S., to put out queries/ a.k.a. commit espionage upon 26 of Trump’s associates -- including Ben Carson.
Tom Fitton brings up a solid point on the Shellenberger bombshells: it is the U.S. Congress that now must secure the hidden CIA documents, referenced by reliable witnesses, on the agency's efforts to undermine Trump before the 2016 and 2020 elections. Further, it is necessary that Obama be subject to the same investigative furor to which Trump has been subject to -- undoubtedly under Obama's direction. Shellenberger summarizes the CIA surveillance scheme, what he describes as a two-part strategy:
“Now, multiple credible sources tell Public and Racket {Matt Taibbi’s site} that the United States Intelligence Community (IC), including the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), illegally mobilized foreign intelligence agencies to target Trump advisors long before the summer of 2016.
The new information fills many gaps in our understanding of the Russia collusion hoax and is supported by testimony already in the public record.
Until now, the official story has been that the FBI’s investigation began after Australian intelligence officials told US officials that a Trump aide had boasted to an Australian diplomat that Russia had damning material about Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.
In truth, the US IC asked the “Five Eyes” intelligence alliance to surveil Trump’s associates and share the intelligence they acquired with US agencies, say sources close to a House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HSPCI) investigation. The Five Eyes nations are the US, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.”
Remember the raid on Trump’s home at Mar-a-Lago?
“After Public and Racket {Matt Taibi’s site} had been told that President Barack Obama’s CIA Director, John Brennan, had identified 26 Trump associates for the Five Eyes to target, a source confirmed that the IC had “identified [them] as people to ‘bump,’ or make contact with or manipulate. They were targets of our own IC and law enforcement -- targets for collection and misinformation.”
Unknown details about the FBI’s investigation of the Trump campaign and raw intelligence related to the IC’s surveillance of the Trump campaign are in a 10-inch binder that Trump ordered to be declassified at the very end of his term, sources told Public and Racket.
If the top-secret documents exist proving these charges, they are potentially proof that multiple US intelligence officials broke laws against spying and election interference.”
Oh, my -- is that why they broke into Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home? Worried that he may have kept a copy of those documents he wanted unclassified?
The New York Post also recaps parts of the Shellenberger release:
“The US Intelligence Community asked foreign spy agencies to surveil 26 associates of Donald Trump in the run-up to the 2016 election, which triggered the allegations that the former president’s campaign had been colluding with Russia, according to a report.
Former CIA Director John Brennan identified and presented the targets to the US’s intelligence-sharing partners in the so-called “Five Eyes” agencies -- the intelligence-gathering organizations in the US, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand -- according to a report published Monday on Michael Shellenberger’s Public Substack.”
In 2022, Taibbi and Shellenberger were involved in the publishing of the Twitter Files expose, which detailed how the social media giant’s previous management team sought to silence controversial voices and suppress news items such as The Post’s reporting on Hunter Biden’s laptop.”
Shellenberger told Jesse Watters two days ago, “The CIA is currently hiding this report.”
Where’s the congressional oversight? It’s time for the U.S. Congress to step it up. It well may be their last chance. This story hasn’t ended yet, just worsened.
Image: Michael Shellenberger
Has Our Government Erased the First Amendment?
The most important thing you will see this week is this interview of Mike Benz by Tucker Carlson: Benz is with the Foundation for Freedom, which tracks government censorship. In this interview he explains how our government rigged elections abroad and has now, through DHS (Department of Homeland Security) and CISA (Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency), censored online communications, noting that its most substantial censorship involved blocking and limiting any critiques online respecting the government’s responses to COVID-19 and the security of the 2020 election.
It's a well-detailed account that I urge you in the strongest terms to view.
In short form, here’s a summary, but it cannot do this chilling interview complete justice:
THREAD:
speaks with
Mike Benz outlines how the government established a permanent domestic censorship office under the pretext of countering misinformation. and disinformation. Initially considered for the State Department, CIA, and FBI, the censorship office found its home in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), utilizing the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). DHS classified elections as critical infrastructure and online misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation as cybersecurity attacks. The original goal of countering Russian disinformation shifted to suppressing domestic dissent and the populist movement led by President Trump. Examining the 2020 election's censorship strategy, Benz details CISA's collaboration with Stanford University, University of Washington, Graphika, and the Atlantic Council through the Election Integrity Partnership. The censorship consortium employed coercive tactics, leveraging its deputized status to pressure tech companies through government threats. A critical element was the seven-month pre-censorship campaign before the 2020 election. The consortium compelled social media companies to introduce a new "delegitimization" violation, targeting content challenging faith in mail-in ballots, early voting, and ballot drop boxes. The overarching goal was narrative control, preventing doubts about a Biden victory and avoiding a crisis akin to the 2000 Bush-Gore election. Anticipating Biden's victory hinging on mail-in ballots, early voting, and ballot dropboxes, the consortium precensored any questioning of the election's legitimacy, particularly if Trump appeared to win on election night but later lost due to late-arriving mail-in ballots. The so-called "Red Mirage-Blue Shift event."
The DHS outsourced censorship to the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), comprised of four organizations: Stanford Internet Observatory, the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public, Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, and Graphika. During the 2020 election: •120 analysts monitored 15 tech platforms •22 Million tweets labeled “misinformation” •Entire “misinformation narratives” targeted for platform-wide throttling The EIP claimed every "repeat spreader of election misinformation" was a supporter of President Trump.
Benz explains that in about 2016 the government could no longer count on its backdoor to the legacy media -- favor for favor and access -- to control communications across a broad spectrum, something that had served it well as a censorship tool for decades.
The internet had far wider reach and allowed independent voices to outcompete the legacy media, which had been the government’s reliable megaphones. The growth of huge social media platforms disrupted the government’s usual speech-control techniques and it scrambled to find new ways to control what we learned as legacy media was shrinking in reach and respect. Using the fraudulent Russiagate as a justification for their conduct, they were forced to seek new, less plausible justifications when the Mueller investigation established that pretext would be unavailing.
The extent of the government's meddling was revealed when Elon Musk took over and released internal files revealing much of the government censorship of what was then Twitter. The election of a Republican House willing to examine this overreach also exposed the scheme. While the government relies in large part on technology Musk has developed so it has less leverage over him than it has on other platforms, through a combination of lawsuits against him and the aid of the EU it enlisted to fine noncompliance with its censorship it still is trying to restrict free speech on X, presently the largest free speech platform in the world.
There are several cases now pending in the Supreme Court questioning whether the government can censor internet communications through proxies what it cannot do directly.
The most significant is Murthy v. Missouri. In July 2023 the District Court issued a preliminary injunction against the Department of Justice, Department of Health and Human Services, State Department, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the FBI from contacting social media services in order to urge, encourage, pressure or induce the “removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech.” These same agencies were enjoined from communicating with three academic programs at Stanford University and the University of Washington which were engaged in censorship activities on behalf of the federal government which funded them. On appeal the Fifth Circuit upheld the district court ruling, but placed the injunction on hold pending Supreme Court action. (Subsequently, the Fifth Circuit expanded the injunction to include CISA. finding that agency interacted with social media platforms “to push them to adopt more restrictive policies on election-related speech.”) With Justices Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch dissenting, the Court lifted the injunction while the case proceeds. Alito wrote, ”Government censorship of private speech is antithetical to our democratic form of government, and therefore today’s decision is highly disturbing.”
Murthy is not the only government censorship case pending decision in the Supreme Court. There’s NRA v. Vullo questioning whether the threats by New York’s Department of Financial Services against regulated banks and insurance companied to sever ties with the NRA violates the First Amendment.
And there are two companion cases, Net Choice v Paxton and Moody v Net Choice, involving formal legislation regulating social media content.
Two other free speech cases are pending in the Supreme Court -- Lindke v. Freed and O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier, both of which concern when and whether a government official’s use of a social media platform becomes state action.
New technologies offer promise and challenges to the Deep State. Benz has made a persuasive historically accurate case demonstrating how techniques developed by government agencies to meddle with elections abroad have now metastasized online to interfere with domestic elections and policies. He has also persuasively shown how these agencies fear popular control, justifying their actions by confusing the concept of “democracy” with the preservation of existing institutions like NATO and the IMF. And, of course, their own power to continue to control public perceptions of government policies and elections.
From Trump On Down, Democrats Are Silencing The Opposition
Following his historic federal indictment, Donald Trump correctly observed, “In reality, they’re not after me, they’re after you. I’m just in the way.”
Indeed, as the Democrat/Federal/Media cabal proceeds with its blatant lawlessness, banana republic indictments, frog march arrests, and kangaroo show trials, its members argue that all of this is both by the book and quite necessary—prompted by things like unprecedented, dangerous, and horrendous threats from MAGA extremists, white supremacists, terrorists, anthropogenic climate change, and attacks on democracy. Daring to speak truth about the COVID virus and treatments, about Hunter or Joe Biden, about the irregularities and illegalities that occurred in the 2020 election, the invasion of illegal aliens, mis-gendering someone, constitutes speech drawing punishments ranging from suspension or censorship, to IRS and FBI visits, to fines, or to imprisonment.
We see extensive news and analysis discussing how Republican and conservative conduct around elections (past and present) constitutes election interference, racketeering, soliciting a public official to violate his oath of office, conspiracy to commit forgery and file false documents, insurrection, making false statements, hate speech, threats to public safety, and more. President Trump and those around him, of course, receive much of this attention, but they are by no means the only ones suffering from the assault. In fact, as he has noted, he is not even the primary target.
Image: I’m in the way poster. Creator unknown.
A growing number of Americans is beginning to realize that there is another purpose to and message behind Democrats’ actions that extends to everyday people who might not like or support one or more of the things that the cabal is forcing upon them—things such as discriminatory CRT and DEI doctrines throughout our schools, weaponized federal agencies and the military, protection for BLM and Antifa violence, open borders for illegal and unvetted aliens, toxic and irreversible “gender affirming” treatments for minors, biological males in women’s spaces, costly and destructive “green” policies, massive taxpayer funds sent to Ukraine, student loan bailouts, mask and vaccine mandates, mandatory preferred pronoun usage, prevention or punishment of free speech, and so much more.
The debates regarding the constitutionality of given administration policies and actions, the validity and severity of the charges, the actual guilt or innocence of the accused, the likelihood of conviction, and the consequences of either acquittal or conviction are all popular headlines, all of which serve to distract from the central point behind these exercises: We Americans must understand that the cabal can and will use mob rule, lawfare, and bureaucratic fiats to effect its agenda, even when doing so is clearly politically motivated, invalid and unconstitutional, with the process itself often intended to ensure that political opponents yield to the cabal’s force. Nothing will stop them.
If you are an outspoken journalist, the IRS will be sent to your home. If you are a concerned citizen who shows up to silently protest one of the cabal’s pet missions, you will be arrested. If you speak up at a school board meeting because your daughter was sexually assaulted by a transgendered assailant, you might be tackled and cuffed. If a given school actually tries to remove damaging wokism from its system all together, the feds will investigate it for civil rights violations. If you produce effective conservative messaging for Google and YouTube (which together control some 90% of worldwide internet searches), the courts won’t stop Google and YouTube from restricting or banning you entirely.
It’s working. In their piece, “Keeping Your Mouth Shut: Spiraling Self-Censorship in the United States,” researchers report that the percentage of Americans who say they feel “less free to speak their minds than they used to” has never been higher. It’s now at 46%—compared to just 13.4% during the red scare of 70 years ago.
With such a convincing display of sheer totalitarian power, the typical American now worries that a $100 donation to American Thinker, Hillsdale College, Judicial Watch, or his church may put him on a federal watch list—or that he may increase his chances of being fined or sued by a federal agency, audited, arrested, or otherwise harassed.
He now wonders about the impact of cabal soldiers watching his social media posts, his email, and his overall internet presence. He now refuses to click either “like” or “dislike” for any post for fear of ramifications.
In past years he may have displayed campaign signs in his yard for his preferred candidates, but he’d be terrified to do so today. He even worries about some of the political or group affinity literature that might be seen in his mailbox.
He wonders if showing up at a simple rally, presentation, or school board meeting could mean he ends up in handcuffs and/or jail.
He has become more hesitant to discuss any dissenting views in public or private, fearing that he may simply not know where the danger in doing so could lie.
He wonders if he is now being monitored because he purchased ammunition or joined the NRA.
He now leaves his baseball hat and t-shirt, both which have American flags on them, in the drawer for fear they could make him a target. After all, even Republicans thought better about displaying one as part of the recent debate stage.
He now realizes that the point of publicly targeting and punishing cabal dissidents is to send a very clear lesson to the rest of America. The power of the cabal is the point. Behold it. Fear it. Obey it.
Twenty years ago, such expressed worries might have produced laughs and suggestions for tin foil hats. No one is laughing today.
Russiagate was the pivotal event that helped the cabal become more comfortable with its power, with both its capabilities and invulnerability. We now know that Russiagate was nothing short of a soft coup attempt that involved a litany of audacious and illegal actions to significantly hobble or even overthrow a legitimately elected president. The second objective failed, but the first was wildly successful—with the icing on the cake being that not a single conspirator was punished. Neither key leadership members nor operatives paid a price. A solitary, FISA-falsifying lawyer with a suspended sentence was the extent of the “accountability.”
If a football team has had nothing but success with running to the left side of its opponents in a given game, what play might the coach call in the 4th quarter with the game on the line? We see the same play unfolding today, only Democrats aren’t just using Russiagate to attack the quarterback. They’re using January 6 to wipe out the whole team.
Many Americans have been waiting for the adults in the room to wake up and end the madness. But any such adults are either asleep or occupied with their own legal battles. At this writing, the cabal is up to indictment number four for President Trump, along with who knows how many civil suits, as well as attacking any prominent people who supported him.
In none of these cases does America have the backstop of the U.S. Senate to shield us from the travesty. President Trump is facing a brazen White House and chief executive, extreme leftist prosecutors, hopelessly biased judges, and stacked juries, along with a rabid and cheerleading media. The odds are better than not that at least one of these initiatives will see President Trump in jail sometime next year. In other words, it appears quite likely, at this point, that very soon, he will no longer “be in their way.” Then what?
No comments:
Post a Comment