This is the right move, Mr. President. Hit ’em where it hurts:
On June 10th, the United States will impose a 5% Tariff on all goods coming into our Country from Mexico, until such time as illegal migrants coming through Mexico, and into our Country, STOP. The Tariff will gradually increase until the Illegal Immigration problem is remedied,..
Mexico has taken advantage of the United States for decades. Because of the Dems, our Immigration Laws are BAD. Mexico makes a FORTUNE from the U.S., have for decades, they can easily fix this problem. Time for them to finally do what must be done!
In order not to pay Tariffs, if they start rising, companies will leave Mexico, which has taken 30% of our Auto Industry, and come back home to the USA. Mexico must take back their country from the drug lords and cartels. The Tariff is about stopping drugs as well as illegals!
When the American people finally DO turn against the Uniparty, it will first require Republicans and Democrats to put aside many of their differences in recognition of the fact that the Uniparty, not the other side, is responsible for all they decry and lament about America.
For the most part, I’m not talking about the politicians because most politicians are the Uniparty. I’m mainly talking about the voters, the masses, but also the handful of rogue politicians out there that aren’t under the thumb/in the pocket of the Uniparty.
In order to actually overthrow the Uniparty it will require grassroots Republicans and grassroots Democrats to recognize that there is far worse out there than each other.
So what would that look like? What would it look like for the grassroots right and the grassroots left to come together, put aside their differences and focus on the major points of agreement rather than differences? By major points of agreement, I mean on genuinely consequential issues: it doesn’t count as bipartisanship if it’s some silly thing like passing a resolution saying “We Hate Cancer.”
And it also has to be an issue that is genuinely in the interest of the American people. If the Establishment wings of both parties come together and pass a horrendous omnibus bill that guts border security and further opens the border, that doesn’t count. In fact that’s simply the Uniparty doing its thing. That’s business as usual. Also something that doesn’t count: the Establishment wings of both parties coming together to start a foreign war.
So here we have a genuine Republican populist, Ted Cruz, coming together with a seemingly (more on this later) genuine Democratic populist, Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, on an issue that is truly in the interest of the American people: putting an end to the Congress-to-K-Street-Pipeline.
For those who don’t know, K-Street is the street in D.C. where most of the lobbying firms are located, and so when someone says “K-Street,” they’re referring to the Washington lobbying industry. In 2015, the Washington Free Beacon reported that since 1998, a total of 427 former Members of Congress went into lobbying after leaving Congress. It’s such a common tradition that it’s come to be known as the Revolving Door, or the Congress-to-K-Street-Pipeline. With 427 former Members of Congress in the lobbying business, that means there are nearly as many former Members of Congress lobbying Congress as there are Members in Congress.
This was how the bipartisanship began:
The tweet Ocasio-Cortez is reacting to is a report that nearly 60% of the former Members that left Congress in January of this year went into lobbying. Cortez said it should be illegal for former Members of Congress to go into lobbying. Ted Cruz saw her tweet and agreed:
Ocasio-Cortez was more than receptive–she was all-in:
This is so much more encouraging and gratifying than the constant OWNING and DESTROYING one another we’ve grown accustomed to when it comes to partisan politics.
Usually, it would be something like this: Ocasio-Cortez says something on Twitter, then a Republican quote tweets her and says something to the effect of, “WHAT A F*CKING IDIOT” and gets 50k likes. Or vice versa.
This bare-knuckle brawling and dunking on one another is definitely popular with us partisans, because we’ve all grown so accustomed to seeing the other side as the Great Satan above all others.
But doesn’t this just feel better? Doesn’t this make you more optimistic about the future of our country, to see two politicians who are seemingly bitter opposites coming together to take action against the real enemy?
When we see Politician We Like 💯🔥ABSOLUTELY OWN💯🔥 Politician We Don’t Like, it doesn’t actually make us feel good. It just indulges our partisan hatred. It confirms the views we already hold. And that isn’t inherently bad, because a lot of times the libs do deserve to be OWNED, but it doesn’t actually get us anywhere as a country.
The real enemy–the Uniparty–loves the partisan mudslinging more than any of us because it means we’re not focused on the Uniparty, which is the true source of misery and evil in the country.
What the Uniparty hates, on the other hand, is when politicians it doesn’t control, like Ted Cruz and Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez (maybe–again, more on her later) come together, seemingly against all odds, and propose something that is bad for the Uniparty and, by definition, good for the American people.
There is no good reason for former Members of Congress to go into lobbying. It doesn’t benefit the American people; it benefits the special interests. It’s taking someone who knows the legislative process from the inside and tasking them with manipulating the legislative process and their former colleagues in order to give the upper hand to the special interests, from Big Pharma to the Military Industrial Complex and beyond. Think about it: a former Member of Congress makes the perfect lobbyist.
This unholy marriage of Big Business and Big Government is the very essence of the Uniparty. It’s how the two have basically merged and become one.
And so while banning former Members of Congress from going into lobbying would certainly not bring the whole corrupt Uniparty system to its knees, it would nonetheless be a victory for the American people.
Of course, this could all be a Uniparty psyop meant to give the people false hope before crushing it in order to demoralize. That’s possible. The Uniparty does this all the time.
If this is the case it would mean both Cruz and Ocasio-Cortez are faux-populists who exist to give the American people the impression that Congress is not 100% dominated by the Uniparty. Again, this is possible.
Remember in the 2016 GOP primary, the final two candidates were Trump and Ted Cruz and the GOP Establishment was already moaning that no matter who won, it was screwed. Whether the voters ultimately chose Trump or Cruz, the Establishment knew neither was Their Guy.
The GOP Establishment hated Ted Cruz nearly as much as it hated Trump. In fact Trump was the only candidate the Establishment despised more than Cruz.
Cruz obviously is not as big of an outsider as Trump, but he’s an outsider alright. Cruz has pissed off the Establishment at every step since he first began running for Senate back in 2011. Remember, he was the Tea Party insurgent candidate who defeated the Establishment Careerist David Dewhurst in the Republican Senate Primary in 2012. Like Trump in 2016, the Establishment in 2012 said that Cruz winning the primary was a disaster because he was too conservative to win the general election.
So I trust Ted Cruz. He’s one of the few politicians I can say that about with a reasonable degree of confidence, but the reason I trust him is because all the right people hate him and have tried to stop him at every step of the way.
The real question is, do we trust Ocasio Cortez? Is she really as much of a populist, anti-Establishment rabble-rouser as she claims to be?
I’m kind of torn on that question. On one hand I think she could be the genuine article—a genuine populist, anti-Establishment, Bernie Sanders-like figure who really and truly represents a threat to Uniparty rule—but on the other hand I think the Uniparty may well have already gotten to her and flipped her.
The reason I say Ocasio-Cortez may already have been flipped to the Uniparty is because of all the positive Uniparty media coverage she gets. She’s become a national celebrity, and these days you generally don’t get to become a popular national celebrity who is covered positively by the Uniparty media unless you are one of them.
When you have CNN, FiveThirtyEight, New Yorker and Wired all saying positive things about you, it definitely calls into question your Outsider Credentials.
And yet, on the other hand, Nancy Pelosi seems to really despise Ocasio-Cortez, which is a major boost to her anti-Uniparty bonafides:
And Ocasio-Cortez, like Cruz, like Trump, was a genuine outsider candidate who upset an establishment politician in her primary race.
So is Ocasio-Cortez a genuine populist who will ultimately be an ally against the Uniparty, or have they already gotten to her and turned her into a puppet?
Martin Luther King Jr., the Civil Rights Leader credited with almost single-handedly bringing an end to the Jim Crow-era and securing equal rights for black Americans, whose birthday is now a national holiday, who now has his own monument in Washington D.C. alongside Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln and Roosevelt, and who has countless roads and schools named after him across the country, apparently had a dark side that is about to be uncovered for the nation to see:
“Secret FBI tapes that accuse Martin Luther King Jr of having extramarital affairs with ’40 to 45 women’ and even claim he ‘looked on and laughed’ as a pastor friend raped a parishioner exist, an author has claimed.
The civil rights hero was also heard allegedly joking he was the founder of the ‘International Association for the Advancement of P***y-Eaters’ on an agency recording that was obtained by bugging his room, according to the sensational claims made by biographer David Garrow – a Pulitzer prize-winning author and biographer of MLK.”
This guy Garrow won a Pulitzer Prize in 1987 for his biography on MLK. Hardly seems like a guy with an axe to grind against MLK. This makes his claims credible.
“Writing in British magazine Standpoint, Garrow says that the shocking files could lead to a ‘painful historical reckoning’ for the man who is celebrated across the world for his campaign against racial injustice.
Along with many US civil rights figures, King was subject to an FBI campaign of surveillance ordered by Director J Edgar Hoover in an effort to undermine his power amid fears he could have links to the Communist Party.”
From what I recall, it should not be news to anyone that MLK was relentlessly spied on and even blackmailed by the FBI. I thought this was fairly common knowledge because I remember hearing it long before reading this article. Some time ago I remember coming across that anonymous letter sent to MLK trying to blackmail him into killing himself. That letter has been publicly known since the 1970s.
I also remember hearing in the past that MLK was a serial philanderer, and I feel like this, too, was fairly common knowledge prior to the publication of this article. In fact MLK’s philandering was pretty obviously the central focus of the anonymous letter.
The difference now is that we have a Pulitzer-winning author going on record about it all and detailing specific allegations.
“The FBI surveillance tapes detailing his indiscretions are being held in a vault at the U.S. National Archives and are not due for release until 2027.”
And who knows if we’ll even get them then.
“But David Garrow, a biographer of King who won a Pulitzer Prize for his 1987 book Bearing the Cross about the Baptist minister, has unearthed the FBI summaries of the various incidents.
In an article to be published in Standpoint, Garrow tells how the FBI planted transmitters in two lamps in hotel rooms booked by King in January 1964, according to The Sunday Times.
The recording from the Willard Hotel near the White House shows how King was accompanied his friend Logan Kearse, the pastor of Baltimore’s Cornerstone Baptist church who died in 1991, along with several female parishioners of his church.
In King’s hotel room, the files claim they then ‘discussed which women among the parishioners would be suitable for natural and unnatural sex acts’.
The FBI document says: ‘When one of the women protested that she did not approve, the Baptist minister immediately and forcefully raped her’ as King watched.
He is alleged to have ‘looked on, laugh and offered advice’ during the encounter. FBI agents were in the room next door but did not intervene.
The following day, King and a dozen others allegedly participated in a ‘sex orgy’ engaging in ‘acts of degeneracy and depravity’. When one woman showed reluctance, King was allegedly heard saying that performing the act ‘would help your soul’.
This is some bizarre stuff.
“Senior FBI officials later sent King a copy of the incriminating tape and called him an ‘evil abnormal beast’ and his sexual exploits would be ‘on record for all time’.
The letter also suggested he should commit suicide before his wrongs were revealed to the world.”
So this was what the anonymous letter referred to.
“King’s philandering has long been suspected, however Garrow, who spent several months digging through the archive material, said he had no idea of the scale or the ugliness of it and his apparent indifference to rape until he saw the files.
He said: ‘It poses so fundamental a challenge to his historical stature as to require the most complete and extensive historical review possible.'”
You’d think in the #MeToo-era this type of story would be a bigger deal, but I guess not.
Will there be demands to remove MLK’s name from the countless streets and schools that are named after him? I doubt it.
“Special counsel Robert Mueller, in his first public statement about his Russia probe, did not exonerate President Trump, instead explaining why his office never considered indicting him for obstruction of justice.
“As set forth in the report, after the investigation, if we had confidence that the president did not clearly commit a crime, we would have said so,” he told reporters at the Justice Department Wednesday.”
You might be wondering: “Wait, what about Russian Collusion? Wasn’t that the whole point of the Mueller investigation? Why would they lead with ‘obstruction of justice’?”
Keep up, sillyhead: When Mueller first released his report back in March, it firmly slammed the door on any hopes of nailing Trump for colluding with Russia. Not a single person was charged with anything remotely relating to a conspiracy with Russia. All hopes of uncovering a conspiracy between Trump and Putin were stomped out. And so at that point, our “media,” in its desperation to cling to anything that might keep the dream of impeachment alive, immediately and seamlessly pivoted to “Obstruction of Justice” and pretended all the hysteria and hyperbole over the past two years was never about Russian Collusion at all.
Because “Obstruction of Justice” (again, on an investigation that never should have been opened in the first place, and which itself was almost certainly orchestrated as part of a grand criminal conspiracy against Trump) was the one thing Mueller kinda, sorta left the door open on.
So Democrats in Congress and the Media immediately picked up the “OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE!!!!” thread and have been running with it for the past several months, even though Mueller himself never brought any charges for obstruction against Trump when he had the opportunity to do so.
Anyway, the CBS article continues:
“Mueller also indicated he would decline to testify before Congress, as many Democrats had hoped.
“Any testimony from this office would not go beyond our report. It contains our findings and analysis, and the reasons for the decisions we made. We chose those words carefully, and the work speaks for itself,” Mueller said. “The report is my testimony. I would not provide information beyond that which is already public in any appearance before Congress.”
So on one hand Mueller flatly says his office’s report contains everything he has to say on the matter, and that having him testify before Congress would be pointless because he’s already said everything he had to say in his report.
Yet on the other hand, he felt the need to make this public statement today in which apparently his main goal was to stoke the rabid left’s impeachment fervor and keep the dream alive, even though in Mueller’s report–which, again, he claimed said all there was to say on the matter–he declined to prosecute Trump on anything at all.
So Mueller is telling us that his report was the be-all, end-all–but also that it kinda wasn’t. Y’know: *wink wink, nudge nudge.*
If you didn’t get the hint by now, Mueller then went on and made it completely obvious what his reason was for making a public statement today:
“The Justice Department policy prohibiting the indictment of a sitting president meant that “charging the president with a crime was therefore not an option we could consider,” Mueller said, adding that the Constitution requires a “process other than the criminal justice system” to address wrongdoing by a president.”
Translation: “We didn’t charge Trump with a crime because Justice Department policy prohibited us from doing so, not because there were no crimes to charge Trump with.”
Democrats heard that loud and clear.
Hmm, what could Mueller possibly have meant when he said “a process other than the criminal justice system”?
But then the cowardly Mueller tried to make it seem as if his main goal–in hinting that Congressional Democrats should impeach Trump–was being fair to Trump:
“It would be unfair to potentially accuse someone of a crime” knowing the issue could not be resolved in the courts, Mueller said.
Yes, Bob: I’m sure the only reason you didn’t charge Trump was because you were just trying to be fair to him. Even though you all but accused him of a crime and recommended Democrats begin impeachment proceedings today.
Sean Davis of the Federalist dissects Mueller’s public statement:
“Referring to indictments against various Russian individuals and institutions for allegedly hacking American servers during the 2016 election, Mueller said that the indictments “contain allegations and we are not commenting on the guilt or innocence of any specific defendant. Every defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.”
Had he stopped there, he would have been correct. But then he crafted a brand new standard.
“The order appointing the special counsel authorized us to investigate actions that could obstruct the investigation. We conducted that investigation and kept the office of the acting attorney general apprised of our work,” Mueller said. “After that investigation, if we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.”
According to Mueller and his team, charged Russians are presumed innocent. An American president, however, is presumed guilty unless and until Mueller’s team determines he is innocent. Such a standard is an obscene abomination against the rule of law, one that would never be committed by independent attorneys who place a fidelity to their oaths and impartial enforcement of the law ahead of their political motivations.”
Gotta love Bob Mueller flipping the entire foundation of American justice on its head.
No court in the history of this country has ever declared someone “innocent.”
What do they say at the end of every court case?
Either “Guilty,” or “Not guilty.”
Never in the history of the United States has the word “Innocent” been used at the end of a court case.
That’s not how it works. Courts don’t find people “Guilty” or “Innocent.” You are either found guilty of the crimes you were accused of, or you are found not guilty.
It is not the goal of a legal proceeding to find someone “Innocent.” The only question that must be answered is, “Is the accused guilty or not?”
Is there enough evidence to convict the defendant of the crimes he is accused of? If so, he is guilty, if not, he is not guilty.
But never has a court declared someone “innocent.” And yet somehow, Robert Mueller, a man who clearly knows better, just stated otherwise on national television in a case that pertains to the President of the United States.
Mueller knew exactly what he was doing. Instead of saying, “The President is not guilty,” he said “We could not prove the President’s innocence,” knowing full well that it has never been the job of any legal investigation in the history of this country to prove someone’s innocence.
John Cardillo brings up an excellent comparison to Ken Starr, the Special Counsel who investigated Bill Clinton in the 1990s:
Mueller is a coward.
Ken Starr plainly stated the laws Bill Clinton broke.
Mueller had no case and is too pompous to admit defeat so he clouded the presumption of innocence for a political second bite at the apple.
For anyone out there still unsure of what kind of guy Robert Mueller is, look no further than his statement today. He’s a Uniparty tyrant through-and-through. His goal is the same as Hillary’s, Obama’s, Comey’s, Clapper’s, Brennan’s and the Media’s: overturn the result of the 2016 Presidential election.
The worst thing about the Trump-era legal standard of Partisan Judges Are Our Supreme Rulers is the propaganda “media” smugly pretending every anti-Trump ruling is not blatant partisanship at work, and acting as if obviously partisan judges are totally beyond reproach, so long as they rule against Trump.
According to the “mainstream media,” you’re not allowed to take issue with this because Judges Reign Supreme:
“An Obama judge in San Francisco issued a nonsensical, lawless order May 24 temporarily stopping President Trump from accessing reallocated military funding to pay for the construction of a desperately needed wall on the nation’s leaky southern border.The case will almost certainly end up before the Supreme Court in the future.”
The nation WILL be flooded with poor third-worlders and there’s nothing the Orange Man can do to stop it!
“U.S. District Judge Haywood S. Gilliam Jr., appointed by then-President Barack Hussein Obama in 2014, enjoined the Trump administration “from taking any action to construct a border barrier” with reassigned U.S. Department of Defense funds in parts of Arizona and Texas known as Yuma Sector Project 1 and El Paso Sector Project 1.
During the confirmation process before the U.S. Senate, Gilliam insisted that judges should be impartial.
“I believe that the most important attribute of a judge is the commitment to faithfully and impartially apply the law in every case, without regard to the type of matter or the identity of the parties,” he said.”
Spoiler alert: he was lying his ass off.
“The leftist judge reportedly made large donations to Democrats from 2007 to the end of 2014 when he was sworn in as a judge.
Gilliam gave $6,900 to the presidential campaign of the man who appointed him, divided between $4,600 to Obama for America and $2,300 to the Obama Victory Fund. The judge also donated a separate $13,500 to Obama for America and Obama Victory Fund 2012, along with $4,500 to the Democratic National Committee.”
Not a hint of partisanship. Not a hint of corruption. How DARE you even suggest that a Federal Judge be anything less than completely unbiased, perfectly rational Vulcan-esque superior lifeform.
“The Law Has Spoken! Trump’s border wall is UNCONSTITUTIONAL!”
Under the “ORANGE MAN BAD” legal doctrine, the Wall is illegal.
You are not allowed to question this judge’s reasons or legitimacy. Show some respect!
If you want to read up on the nonsensical reasoning this “judge” used to arrive at the conclusion of “NO MORE WALL!” then by all means visit the link at the top.
But personally, I can’t stomach reading about yet more blatant, in-your-face corruption. I just don’t want to. This judge is openly and ostentatiously corrupt and doesn’t care who knows it, so sure is he of his own untouchability.
His ruling may as well have read: “Yeah, I’m partisan as all hell. Yeah, I donated thousands of dollars to Obama, who later returned the favor by nominating me to be a federal judge. Yeah, I pretended to be non-partisan so I would be confirmed by the Senate. Yeah, I just issued a bullshit ruling with no legal legitimacy whatsoever purely to stop the border wall being built by any means necessary. And yeah, I’m gonna get away with all of it, because I’m part of the Uniparty and I have the media, the Democrats, Hollywood, Big Business, Academia and Silicon Valley backing me up.”
I don’t care to read about the “Judge’s” contrived ruling because there is no way a border wall is unconstitutional. The Secure Fence Act was signed into law in 2007 with Senators Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, John Kerry and many other prominent Democrats voting in favor of it.
Now all the sudden these same Democrats and their cronies would swear on a stack of Bibles that the Constitution explicitly states a border wall is not permitted.
They are coming up with every possible bullshit excuse to stop this wall from going up despite the fact that it’s what the American people voted for.
I’ll just say this: the Swamp will be drained one way or another. The American people are not going to tolerate this forever.
We can do this the easy way or the hard way. The “easy” way is that the Uniparty simply respects the result of the 2016 election and allows Trump to clean house in Washington and build his big beautiful wall.
But of course we know the Uniparty will never do this, so it has to be the hard way.
What’s “the hard way”? The Uniparty ain’t gonna like “the hard way”. It looks a lot like what’s going on in France.
You see it all the time: an article or news story begins with, “A new study shows. . .” or “Science says. . . ”
The media frequently uses Appeals to Authority–i.e. Science™–in order to convince you of something, whether it be to eat genetically modified food, not have kids, or, in the event their anti-reproduction propaganda failed to dissuade you from having kids, get your kids vaccinated.
Any time you see an article or news report that begins with “Study shows,” understand that the elite is trying to get you to change your behavior and is using the unassailable authority of Science™ to do so.
For most people, when they see, “Study shows,” they are immediately won over. “It’s gotta be true; Science™ says so.”
But what most people do not know is that their absolute faith in Science™ is misplaced and undeserved. The Scientific™ Community is in the midst of a great Replication Crisis, in which a large percentage–and in certain fields the number is well over a majority–of studies cannot be replicated in subsequent attempts.
The implications here are significant: if a “groundbreaking” study comes out and causes a whole bunch of people to make changes in their lives in response, you would hope that study is on solid ground. But many studies are on anything but.
Replication is extremely important when it comes to scientific studies. It means that after a study is published, other scientists can then conduct the study themselves independently and come to about the same conclusions. If a study’s results can be consistently replicated by other scientists, that means the study is more likely to be valid.
“A landmark study involving 100 scientists from around the world has tried to replicate the findings of 270 recent findings from highly ranked psychology journals and by one measure, only 36 percent turned up the same results. That means that for over half the studies, when scientists used the same methodology, they could not come up with the same results.
“A large portion of replications produced weaker evidence for the original findings despite using materials provided by the original authors, review in advance for methodological fidelity, and high statistical power to detect the original effect sizes,” the team reports in Science today.”
For instance, one of the strongest myths that persists in the psychological field is that depression is caused by a chemical imbalance in the brain and that a depressed person’s only hope in life is consuming drugs produced by Big Pharma. But it’s not true:
“The idea that depression and other mental health conditions are caused by an imbalance of chemicals in the brain is so deeply ingrained in our psyche that it seems almost sacrilegious to question it.
Direct-to-consumer-advertising (DCTA) campaigns, which have expanded the size of the antidepressant market (Donohue et al., 2004), revolve around the claim that SSRIs (the most popular class of antidepressants) alleviate depression by correcting a deficiency of serotonin in the brain.
For example, Pfizer’s television advertisement for Zoloft states that “depression is a serious medical condition that may be due to a chemical imbalance”, and that “Zoloft works to correct this imbalance.”
However, there is one (rather large) problem with this theory: there is absolutely no evidence to support it. Recent reviews of the research have demonstrated no link between depression, or any other mental disorder, and an imbalance of chemicals in the brain (Lacasse & Leo, 2005; (Valenstein, 1998).
If you really think about it, the chemical imbalance theory is pretty obviously BS. When a psychologist or psychiatrist prescribes a patient Zoloft or Prozac or some other anti-depressant, does the shrink conduct a chemical test of the patient’s brain to confirm there’s a “chemical imbalance”? Of course not. Yet they prescribe the drug anyway.
How can they know someone has a chemical imbalance in their brain without testing? While we are endlessly told that depression is caused by chemical imbalance, antidepressant drugs are not handed out based on chemical tests.
And yet go out in the street and ask 10 people at random if they believe depression is caused by a chemical imbalance in the brain, and I’m sure a majority will answer affirmatively. People have been won over by pseudoscience.
The chemical imbalance myth has the effect of making depressed people hopeless. They come to believe that there is basically nothing they can do to feel better: not diet, not exercise, not repairing personal relationships, not reevaluating their career choices–nothing but buying and taking drugs produced by Big Pharma.
It’s not just the psychology field that is mostly junk science. Even the medical science field, which most people consider to be perhaps the most legitimate scientific field of all, is littered with junk studies:
“Low reproducibility rates within life science research undermine cumulative knowledge production and contribute to both delays and costs of therapeutic drug development. An analysis of past studies indicates that the cumulative (total) prevalence of irreproducible preclinical research exceeds 50%, resulting in approximately US$28,000,000,000 (US$28B)/year spent on preclinical research that is not reproducible—in the United States alone.
Indeed, there are many different perspectives on the size of this problem, and published estimates of irreproducibility range from 51%  to 89% ”
As high as 89%! That’s incredible.
The number of fields affected by the Replication Crisis is far greater than just psychology and medical science. Everything from physics to economics and beyond is tainted, and the scariest part is that we don’t even know the full depth and scope of the crisis yet.
The question then becomes, “How did this happen?”
How was Science™ ruined?
The answer, to me, is simple: corruption. Governments and corporations pay scientists to conduct studies that aren’t even really studies at all but instead exist to “confirm” and legitimize preexisting political agendas.
So many studies these days are not conducted to find the truth, but rather to push a certain political agenda.
And so when actual honest scientists get around to trying to replicate the results of these “studies,” they can’t.
But the problem is that the moment these junk studies are published, they are treated as the unassailable truth. Science has spoken! The debunking of the study never makes the news, so the corporate shills masquerading as scientists win the day.
The replication crisis undermines the entire scientific community. From the Wikipedia page on the Replication Crisis:
“Because the reproducibility of experiments is an essential part of the scientific method, the inability to replicate the studies of others has potentially grave consequences for many fields of science in which significant theories are grounded on unreproducible experimental work.”
That sounds like a huge deal, no?
Why is the Mainstream Media not informing Americans about the Replication Crisis? Why do we not hear on the news that the entire institution of Science™ is in the midsts of a massive credibility crisis?
Because the Mainstream Media relies on junk studies and junk science to spread its propaganda. The media elites know most Americans will not double check the studies they cite for replication and validity.
The media knows all it has to do is say, “Science says” or “Study shows” and most Americans will believe every last word that follows.
Yet it is the great irony of our time that we live in an era where the average person’s faith in Science™ has never been more blind and absolute despite the Scientific™ community’s objective credibility being perhaps as low as it has ever been.
“A South African farmer activist who spoke out against brutal attacks on the the country’s white farmers has been found dead.
Annette Kennealy, 51, was founded with multiple wounds to the body on her land in Limpopo province. Colonel Moatshe Ngoepe, a police spokesman, said: “Family members tried to call her without success, until one of them went to investigate. “On arrival he found the deceased inside the house.”
The victim was staying with an employee on her farm in the town of Louis Trichardt when she was attacked. A friend is said to have found her body lying in a pool of blood.
Ian Cameron, head of the Community Safety division of AfriForum, a group that represents the rights of the white Afrikaner minority, said Ms Kennealy had been attacked with a hammer and iron rod.”
“She was outspoken about farm murders. In her last Facebook post, she shared a link claiming that ten farm attacks, including one murder, had been reported in four days.
Police spokesman Col Moatshe said a 40-year-old man had been arrested.
He added: “The suspect will appear before the Louis Trichardt Magistrate Court soon.”
Attacks against South Africa’s white farmers are on the rise with some victims being tortured with electric drills, blowtorches and bleach, according to reports.
Research by Afriforum, a group which champions the rights of the country’s Afrikaner minority, released earlier this year said assaults on the farms shot up 25 percent last year.
And it warned the attacks against landowners were becoming increasingly brutal.
Afriforum spokesman Ernst Roets said there was a “racial element” to the violence with research showing only white farming families suffered such levels of savagery.”
The most effective tool in the Uniparty Media’s propaganda arsenal is not disinformation. It’s not lying to you and selling you a false version of reality, although that does work to shape people’s values and priorities.
No, the the most effective weapon in the Uniparty Media’s arsenal is the power to ignore.
By almost totally ignoring the ongoing genocide of White South Africans, the American media effectively aids and abets it. Our ruling elites are viciously racist against white people, so of course they deliberately choose not to bring attention to this story in South Africa.
If the Uniparty Media wanted, it could through obsessive coverage mobilize a large number of Americans into demanding action be taken about South African farm murders. If the Uniparty Media covered farm murders in South Africa with the same obsessiveness it covered the debunked Russian Collusion Hoax, or Trump’s tax returns, it could save lives in South Africa.
The greatest trick the Establishment ever pulled was dividing the electorate into fiercely competitive and adversarial factions. The end result is that the people are fighting each other instead of their true enemy. Divide and conquer.
The main theme of traditional Left vs. Right American Politics has been Democrats having their fury trained on Big Businesses and how evil the Private sector is, while Republicans are fixated on the evils of big government.
Each side sees the other as the puppet of their great Satan: Democrats see Republicans as in thrall to big business, Republicans see the Democrats as the party of big government.
And here’s the thing: they’re both right.
But both sides miss the real problem: big business and big government are two sides of the same coin: the Uniparty.
The Uniparty is the unholy alliance of big business and big government.
As long as you’re missing the bigger picture and only focusing on one side, the Uniparty wins.
The great trick is to keep Democrats and Republicans divided and attacking one another instead of the Uniparty.
“But there’s lots of genuinely evil people on the left! We need to fight them!”
That’s true. I’m not saying there aren’t anti-white racists on the left. I’m not saying the abortion lovers aren’t out there and in need of thwarting. I’m not saying Antifa isn’t out there. There are indeed lots of genuinely bad people on the left, and it’s perfectly fine to oppose them and their agenda.
But they’re the minority. The vast majority of Democrats are decent people, albeit deeply misled. They’re all not the nutty, unrepentant lunatics we see on Twitter and on Fox News. Most Democrats aren’t going to bark at you about proper gender pronouns.
Democrats also need to realize Republicans aren’t all Evil Racist Nazis hellbent on killing everyone who isn’t a white Christian. Republicans aren’t all gun-toting inbred hicks.
The real enemy is the Uniparty Machine. It’s the big corporations and the politicians they control. Big business and big government have become one, and that’s the true enemy.
They’re the ones flooding our country with poor immigrants. They’re the ones shipping all the jobs overseas. They’re the ones causing housing bubbles. They’re the ones killing us with opioids and poisonous pharmaceutical drugs. They’re the ones who have decimated black families and inner cities.
Keep your eyes on the prize: the only way we will ever actually defeat and dislodge the corrupt Uniparty is when Americans finally realize who the true enemy is.
As long as we’re fighting each other, we’re not fighting the Uniparty.
Please read that again: “Pregnancy kills. Abortion saves lives.”
“Pregnancy kills. Abortion saves lives.”
“Pregnancy kills. Abortion saves lives.”
“Pregnancy kills. Abortion saves lives.”
“Pregnancy kills. Abortion saves lives.”
They really just don’t give a fuck anymore, huh?
They’re like, “We’re telling massive lies straight to your faces and we don’t even care who knows it lol.” They want you to know that there’s nothing you can do to stop them.
Uniparty propaganda is now so shameless that they’re straight-up saying “Pregnancy kills, abortion saves lives.”
The end-goal of their propaganda is now more obvious than ever: depopulation.
The Uniparty elites support abortion because the elites support depopulation. Smaller populations are more easily controlled.
Of course they’ve convinced the useful idiots in the streets that abortion is about a “woman’s right to choose,” but it’s not. It’s about depopulation and eugenics.
Haven’t you noticed just how many of their policy initiatives result in depopulation?
Do you think the elites are unaware of the fact that the US has aborted over 61 million babies since 1973? And that over 1.5 billion babies have been aborted worldwide since 1980?
Virtually nothing happens that they don’t want and plan to happen. You cannot seriously believe that the Uniparty elite doesn’t know exactly what the score is.
What’s the end-goal of “environmentalism”? It’s not Saving The World–the world doesn’t need saving.
The end-goal is you not having kids:
If you want to Save The Planet™, do your part by not having children!
Because A Study™ said so!
What’s the point of so-called “Female Empowerment”?
Depopulation. If women are working into their 30s and beyond, they’re having fewer kids. Working women are great the for the Uniparty: first of all, they’re an untapped supply of labor, which in turn drives down the price of labor. Second of all, working women aren’t having children, leading a declining birthrate, which in turn the Uniparty’s propaganda outlets will use to say, “We are in a population crisis! The only way to solve it is with millions of more poor, third-world immigrants!”
Why does the elite celebrate and promote homosexuality? Because it’s sterile. The elite wants more and more gay people because that means fewer births.
I already know what you’re going to say: “But you’re born gay! How can the elite create more gay people?!”
“Studies of the brains of homosexuals and heterosexuals have found some differences, but have not demonstrated that these differences are inborn rather than the result of environmental factors that influenced both psychological and neurobiological traits,” the report explained. “One environmental factor that appears to be correlated with non-heterosexuality is child sexual abuse victimization, which may also contribute to the higher rates.”
The study was unable to conclude specifically why people are gay, but it was clear in stating that there is not anywhere near sufficient evidence to prove people are born gay.
It’s one of those things people just believe because, well, that’s what Good People believe. Plus they’ve heard it repeated a bunch of times on TV, in movies, on the news, etc.
This goes to show you that repeating something enough times does, in fact, make it “true”–at least in people’s minds.
But “Born This Way” has never been proven by actual science.
Which means sexuality is either a conscious choice, or it’s a product of external/environmental influences. What might those external influences be? Well, like the study said, being sexually abused as a child is a big one. Other non-sexual forms of emotional trauma are another. Then there’s the influence of viewing pornography starting at an early age. And then finally there’s the cultural/social angle of it, meaning propaganda and indoctrination.
Gay people have historically been around 2-4% of the population, and now all the sudden we have a generation that’s 20% gay–meaning 5-10x gayer than previous ones?
You’re telling me that’s not a product of cultural brainwashing and propaganda?
If being gay was entirely biological and natural, we would expect the gay proportion of the population to remain static or at least fluctuate very little over time. If one’s sexuality has nothing to do with external factors, we would expect the gay percentage of the population to be the same today as it was in 1919, 1519 and even 2019 B.C. But it’s not. All of the sudden it’s skyrocketing.
So that means either people today are being brainwashed to be gay or the Uniparty is putting something in the water to turn people gay.
Could be both, honestly.
It’s pretty simple: Pro-gay propaganda makes it socially desirable to be gay. More people than ever nowadays are claiming to be gay. It’s obvious what’s going on.
Folks, there are no accidents in politics. This is not all just a coincidence.
Today’s ruling Uniparty elite is every bit as obsessed with eugenics as the Nazis were. They just go about it in less-obvious ways.
The Uniparty Elite may not have death camps (at least that we know about) but 61 million aborted babies in the US since 1973 speaks for itself.
And the above whopper by the New York Times claiming that pregnancy kills and abortion saves lives is not the first time America’s supposed “paper of record” has gone to bat for the Depopulation Agenda:
Parenting is so hard these days. Better to just avoid it altogether.
“But,” you may ask, “if the Elite want depopulation, then why do they want more immigrants to solve the supposed population crisis?”
Because poor immigrants from the third world are easily controlled. Just give them Free Shit from the government and they’re yours.
The goal is to depopulate America of Americans and repopulate it with “New Americans” who will be subservient to the Uniparty Agenda.
If you haven’t noticed, the Democratic Party’s dominance of national elections is based entirely on foreign-born voters:
No wonder Republicans have only won the popular vote once since 1988.
The goal is to sever our connection to 1776 because of what America As Founded represents: individual liberty, freedom of speech, self-determination, actual human empowerment, self-government, the right to bear arms, etc.
All of those things are Problematic for the Uniparty. And so this is why they want to depopulate America of Americans and repopulate it with poor foreigners who don’t really understand what it means to be free, and who have no connection to 1776.
Are you getting it now?
The Uniparty elite wants all the statues and monuments to the past erased and removed. That’s all part of the plan. Don’t you understand how it works by now? First they come for the stuff that nobody will defend, like the Confederate Statues, then they’ll come for the George Washingtons and Thomas Jeffersons–because they owned slaves!
They come after the indefensible targets first, then they go for their real targets. That’s why they banned Alex Jones and Milo first. Then they’ll come for the “more reasonable” dissidents like Paul Joseph Watson and Steven Crowder, etc.
They want this country to completely start over–without any of that bullshit the original Founding Fathers came up with, like the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence.
They want an America where the people don’t know what it means to be free. And they’re gonna get it, too.
Depopulation is the means; power and control are the ends.
“At one point a leader of the demonstrator chanted this into a loudspeaker: ‘France does not belong to the French. Everyone has a right to be here.'”
Africans see rich, advanced France not as having anything to do with the French. Africans see it as their “right” to enjoy the relatively advanced way of life of the French.
When Western Civilization is finally overrun by enough poor third-worlders seeking not to change their nationalities and assimilate but to simply enjoy the comforts and benefits of our nations, then they will finally learn, after it’s too late, just how much the relative material and economic superiority of the West compared to the rest of the world has to do with Westerners themselves.
This is why I maintain that third-world immigrants who have already made it to America and Europe ought to be the biggest immigration opponents out there: do you really want to turn your new country into your old one? Because that’s what will happen if you get your wish for more open borders.
As Tucker alluded to, Kirsten Gillibrand, the Democratic Senator from New York running (unsuccessfully) for President, recently announced that if elected President she would literally abolish the US border and allow migrants to flood in in unlimited numbers:
“During an interview on CBS’s Face The Nation, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand said, as president, she would end the detention of all border crossers and illegal aliens, instead, releasing every foreign national arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border into American communities if they are claiming asylum.
“As president of the United States, I would not fund any for-profit prisons, I would not lock up these families, I would have a humane immigration policy where people … would have lawyers and have a proper asylum process,” Gillibrand said.
“I wouldn’t keep them in detention at all,” Gillibrand continued. “I wouldn’t … as president of the United States, I wouldn’t use the detention system at all … if someone is seeking asylum, I would assign them a lawyer.”
Wonderful. The rich, liberal white lady wants to overrun this country with migrants because she haz #Compassion.
“Yes, poor, unwashed masses of the world: hurry into America and take a crack at the great piñata. Plunder this rich and bountiful land; enjoy the society its citizens have built. Leech on to and extract the riches of the native population via government welfare and redistribution programs until your host is exhausted.”
It is imperative that we do not allow any of these Democrats near positions of power, but it is especially imperative that we do not allow rich, liberal white women (like Gillibrand) with their Savior Complexes, into the White House.