fake news

Is Trump Going to Get Blown Out in November?

Going into 2020, it seemed like Trump was on course to roll to an easy reelection victory over whomever the Democrats eventually chose as their nominee. Even once it became clear that Biden had locked up the nomination, his obvious mental decline combined with the lack of genuine enthusiasm for his candidacy made it feel like Trump was the prohibitive favorite to win in November.

But that was months ago, before anybody knew what 2020 had in store. Everything has changed, apparently. Polls now show Biden destroying Trump both nationally and in all the major battleground states:

Screen Shot 2020-06-29 at 3.00.44 PM.png

Is Biden really 9 points ahead of Trump nationally? There was even an NY Times poll that came out a week ago that showed Trump down 14 points to Biden nationally.

Is Trump really that unpopular? Is Biden really that popular?

If you go by the news media and social media, absolutely. Social media is all about Black Lives Matter and putting Trump out of his misery.

But something just doesn’t feel right about those poll numbers.

I’ve got some pro-Trump theories on the main factors that will decide the 2020 election:

  • The Silent Majority: we’ll get into this more later but the basic idea is that as the country burns and the corporations publicly swear their fealty to BLM, the silent majority of Americans have steeled their resolve to take their country back in the fall. So many people have been red-pilled over the past month or two. Many have been black-pilled (it’s hard not to be with a nonstop feed of America burning on social media). For every clout-chasing white girl on social media posting BLM support, there’s way more people out there who have been Mega Redpilled, and maybe even turned into full-blown racists. They’re just not publicizing it. This is the Silent Majority factor that is working against Biden.
  • Virtue Signaling White Women: Are they really going to swing hard towards Biden? The Democrats’ win in the 2018 midterms was widely attributed to suburban moms who were disgusted by Trump’s Twitter account and his “lack of decency”. But the problem with that theory was always this: they didn’t vote for Trump in 2016 in the first place. And it’s not like they didn’t know about Trump’s “lack of decency” in 2016. The “grab ’em by the pussy” tape leaked before the 2016 election. All the angry “pussyhat” ladies were marching and Letting Their Voices Be Heard basically the day after the 2016 election. It’s not as if all the Women’s March participants were Trump supporters who swung hard against him between election day 2016 and inauguration day 2017. Trump lost white female college grads 51-44 to Clinton in 2016. It’s not like they left him for the Democrats in 2018, because they weren’t with him to begin with. In 2018, Republicans lost white college women 59-39, but that was with Trump not on the ballot.
  • This leads to the next point: You can’t just assume the 2018 electorate is the same as the 2020 electorate. Republicans won huge in the 2010 midterms and still lost handily in the 2012 election. Democrats’ victory in 2018 does not in any way guarantee a smashing victory for them this fall. Having the President on the ticket is a massive game-changer no matter how you slice it.
  • 2016 redux? There were multiple times in 2016 when it felt like the final nail had been pounded into Trump’s coffin. There were even times in 2016 when it was hard to tell if Trump actually wanted to win the election at all. Maybe there is a method to Trump’s madness. He seems to just be sitting on his ass while the country burns, not bothering to do anything but tweet like he’s a bystander instead of President of the United States. Maybe he’s under more significant quarantine than we’re led to believe. Maybe he’s being sequestered in a basement just like Biden is. I don’t know. Whatever it is, it seems like he’s lost control of the country. And yet, we’ve been here before in 2016 when it seemed like he completely lost control of his campaign and had even given up. Yet he still ended up winning. So I won’t count this guy out.

Now for a (potentially) pro-Biden theory:

  • Urban black voters: the anti-Trump energy in the cities will outweigh the “Return to Normalcy” energy outside of the cities. The Elite’s main goal in provoking the race riots is to juice up black voter enthusiasm for Biden. It’s why they chose Biden in the first place: because he’s popular with black voters. A big reason Hillary lost in 2016 was because she did not get the same black voter turnout in the big cities that Obama got. It’s probably why she lost Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin–because Democrats in those states rely on black voters in Philadelphia, Detroit and Milwaukee, and they just didn’t show up for Hillary the way they did for Obama. So the goal for 2020 is to get black voters motivated to vote for Biden. Will the race riots do the trick? It’s tough to say now, but I think the real question is: will the gain in black voters be more than Biden’s loss in white voters? Because the Democrats have pushed a lot of voters–and not just white voters, but voters of all colors–into Trump’s arms. Most people–black, white, Hispanic, Asian, whatever–prefer stability to chaos, normalcy to abnormality.
  • And the thing is, Biden was actually set up to do fairly well with white voters–at least better than Hillary did. Biden appeals to blue collar workers, especially in the upper midwest. That is precisely the area that flipped from Obama to Trump and put Trump in the White House: Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Iowa. When Biden was Obama’s VP, his main job was to campaign in the Rust Belt and appeal to blue collar whites. But now it might be a moot point because Biden is inexorably associated with the inner-city race riots.

Regardless of what the polls say, I just don’t think there’s been that much of a backlash against Trump. Trump has definitely irritated a lot of his base supporters by not doing much in the face of these riots, and not being more aggressive in re-opening the country. But it’s not like those people are going to vote for Biden. That just makes no sense.

But still: the polls! It’s hard to just completely ignore the polls. But what if the polls truly are bullshit. The elite is pulling out all the stops to try to defeat Trump. So why wouldn’t they rig the polls? They started race riots and carried out a Plannedemic in order to swing the 2020 election. What makes you think they’d balk at rigging the polls?

It’s easy to see why they’d rig the polls. Lots of Trump supporters on social media are despondent, basically resigned to the fact that Trump is going to get wiped out in the fall. They talk a big game about not believing the polls, but I don’t think many of them truly believe the polls are fake and can be disregarded entirely.

But if you view it from the perspective that the Elite is doing everything in their power to steal this election from Trump–months of quarantine, race riots, mail-in voting, social media censorship and purges–then it really wouldn’t be much of a stretch to believe they’re trying to turn the election into a self-fulfilling prophecy by showing poll after poll after poll of Trump getting slaughtered. Eventually even the most ardent Trump supporters start to believe it.

The point is, I just don’t see how Trump can be so far behind. Something feels “off” seeing him down 9+ points in a poll. It just doesn’t accurately reflect the mood I’ve observed in this country in talking to people over the past few months. Yes, that’s all anecdotal. But I’ve been to multiple different states across the country over the past few months and the general consensus is that people want to return to normalcy. People do not like what is happening in this country right now.

Also, I don’t think I’ve met a single Biden supporter. As in, a person who is genuinely excited about voting for Joe Biden. Instead, it feels like the people who have always despised Trump just despise him more obnoxiously than ever now.

Honestly, I feel like the events of the past month have turned more people into Trump supporters, albeit secret Trump supporters. They’re all afraid to admit it.

The idea that Trump is now losing big because he’s lost white support in the suburbs, I just don’t know if I buy that. All the BLM riots and protests of the past month–CHAZ included–that’s all associated with the Democratic Party.

By this point I think most people realize that a vote for Biden is a vote for this:

external-content.duckduckgo

I really can’t see suburban whites voting for that. I can’t see non-college whites endorsing that with a vote for Biden.

Maybe people are lying to the pollsters. Maybe, like 2016, people are scared to admit they support Trump. I would say today’s social climate is even more hostile to Trump supporters than 2016’s was. 2016 honestly feels like child’s play compared to 2020. It could be that simple of an explanation.

Or the polls could be flat-out rigged. I don’t know.

But whatever it is, the polls just feel wrong. Despite what you see on the news and on social media, Americans are not happy about what is happening right now. They want this country to go back to normal. Guns are flying off the shelves. First-time gun-buyers are a common sight. There are millions of Americans who now for the first time in their lives feel unsafe in this country, and it has shaken them to their cores.

That is not an atmosphere conducive to a Biden win.

As I see it, the only place Biden is winning is in the polls and on social media. It could be that I have completely misread the country and don’t know how people are really feeling. But I think I’ve got it right. Social media and the news are not an accurate portrayal of America.

If Trump is going to lose, it’ll be because his supporters stayed home (not likely, because most realize the stakes of this election) and because the Democrats rigged the election with all their mail-in voting (which may have been the motivation behind the Plannedemic all along).

It feels like now more than ever, the polls exist not as a gauge of the political climate, but as yet another way to manipulate and direct the political climate.

The Noose Was Fake

From the moment the Bubba Wallace noose story broke, it seemed highly dubious. And now we know it was yet another Hate Crime Hoax:

Screen Shot 2020-06-23 at 10.26.02 PM

Bubba Wallace is now the Jussie Smollett of NASCAR.

In fact, I’m sure NASCAR itself had a hand in this just so it could join in on the anti-racist virtue signaling and score Woke Points.

Here’s the question: why are so many people desperate to be Victims of White Racism?

If America was as racist as they claim it is, why do they fake racist incidents like these?

Liberals Spreading Misinformation With Doctored Photo on Social Media

Wow, Trump is JUST LIKE HITLER:

EZhKsOtX0Ao9Mwl

Trump is so evil and fascist, he gassed innocent Peaceful Protesters™ so he could go take his Hitler picture! Fascisty FASCIST!

I’m sorry, dummies, but the Hitler picture is fake. Here’s the original:

EZh6XX0U0AEX_fZ

I eagerly await the hordes of Blue Checks on social media to denounce this as a “doctored” image.

Any minute now, Twitter will “Fact Check” people sharing this image and flag them as Fake News.

The Three Types of People Out in the Streets

  • The way to understand the riots is to understand who’s behind them. These are the three main types of people out there destroying the country right now:
    1. Genuine peaceful protesters. It doesn’t seem like there’s many of them because the clips we see on the news and social media only focus on the violence, but there are genuine peaceful protesters out there. Unfortunately, these people are far outnumbered by now and the worst part is, they are enabling and encouraging the next two groups of people by continuing to take to the streets every night.
      Opportunistic looters: they saw the peaceful protests out in the street and saw an opportunity to score a new 4K television. These are the people who by their own admission don’t give a shit about George Floyd, they just saw an opening and took it. See this young man for example:
      Antifa Types: they saw the chaos caused by the opportunistic looters and decided to jump in and start trying to dismantle the Racist Sexist Fascist Nazi Capitalist System. I have a hunch Antifa are behind most of the wanton violence and mayhem. You see a bank smashed up and spray-painted “down with capitalism” or something like that, you have to figure that’s Antifa at work.

    Of course, there’s more than just those three involved here: there’s the brick-providers, importantly. How did all those pallets of bricks get dropped off in cities all around the country in spots where there would be “demonstrating” later that night. These are your “table setters.”

    We’re talking Soros-types who are orchestrating this behind the scenes. You think these protests and riots just come together spontaneously? Not a chance. There’s no way you could make this nationwide without serious planning by a network of experienced professional agitators and political organizers. There’s even demonstrations in London and Amsterdam and I believe even in New Zealand.

    All of this is made worse by the fact that it comes after two and a half months of quarantine. With the outside world mostly shut down and people starting to go stir crazy after all this time spent at home, you can’t be surprised that people were eager to join this nationwide rampage, if only because it was the first taste of freedom in months. Whoever is orchestrating the mayhem knew the lockdown would ensure maximum participation and destruction.

    A certain type of person is attracted to riots/mass demonstrations in general because of anonymity of the crowd that allows them greater “freedom” than usual. In any situation like this, you can loot and vandalize and even set a building on fire and there’s a low probability you’ll even get caught. But now, add on the fact that people have been cooped up inside for two months and you’ve got some real potential for mayhem.

    There’s no way this is a coincidence. Whoever planned this out took full advantage of the fact that people would be extra restless and eager to get out of the house and unleash some pent-up energy.

    In fact, this past week of mayhem has been so well-organized and planned out it’s hard to avoid concluding the whole thing–including the death of George Floyd, including the Coronavirus itself–has been planned out since the beginning.

    NBC News is a Chinese Propaganda Organ

    Who’s keeping score? NBC News is keeping score:

    Who’s side is NBC News on? That should be obvious by this headline.

    To them, it’s a competition between the US and China, and China is winning. NBC News couldn’t be happier.

    This is an off-the-charts level of sycophancy. You’d be hard-pressed to find more blatant cheerleading in actual Chinese state media organs. NBC News is literally saying, “America sucks, China is the greatest.”

    And this barely even scratched the surface of the many ways the US Media has shown itself to be an unequivocal enemy of the United States during the Coronavirus crisis.

    From absurdly focusing on “racism” against Chinese even as the virus was rapidly spreading in America, to discouraging the use of chloroquine for weeks before finally admitting recently that it is an effective treatment for Coronavirus, costing untold lives that could’ve been saved had the media not spent so much time spreading Fake News about the drug, the media has proven to be the Enemy Of The People.

    The News Benders: Truth or Fiction?

    I highly recommend watching this TV episode from 1968 called “The News Benders,” directed by someone named Desmond Lowden. It was part of a TV series called “Thirty-Minute Theatre,” aired on the BBC between 1965-1973. The IMDB page describes the series thusly: “An anthology drama series of short plays shown on BBC Television.”

    It appears to be similar to the Twilight Zone in that each episode has nothing to do with the last or the next–all the episodes are self-contained storylines and plotlines. So there is no background needed to understand what’s happening in this episode.

    It’s 28 minutes long but I promise you, it will fly by. It’s worth your time.

    Just watch it and let me know what you think.

    Is this just a scary idea, or could it actually be how the world truly works?

    The money quote:

    J.G.: “For the past ten years, people have been looking at our fake newsreels, listening to our fake commentaries.”

    Larkin: “And they accept it for the truth?

    *J.G. nods*

    Larkin: “And you can do it. . . Stop 100 people in the street, and how many of them have actually seen a missile or a satellite? They’re just told they exist, and they believe it.”

    J.G.: “Now you’re getting there. I knew you would.”

    It was very difficult to track down this clip. I first saw part of it on Owen Benjamin’s livestream and then found the full 28 minutes on YouTube after a bit of digging. The full show was only uploaded to YouTube yesterday. A five-minute excerpt was uploaded in 2011 but as of today it only has around 900 total views.

    I saw that it was uploaded to archive.org in January of this year. I downloaded the clip and have it saved to my computer, and uploaded the full video here to my site.

    Fascinating stuff.

    ABC News is Fake News

    They were trying to depict Northern Syria as a war-torn hellscape by using footage of an event in Kentucky from a few years ago. They got caught:

    “Mistaking.”

    Uh: They got caught fabricating. It was not a mistake. The mistake was getting caught, not using the fake footage.

    They are trying to keep us in Syria by any means necessary.

    Oh my goodness! Look at all this horrible bombing going on! We can’t leave Syria now!”

    Not gonna work.

    By the way, what’s with all these neocons saying our presence in Syria is small-scale and low-cost, while also claiming that we make a world of a difference there? Which is it?

    They’re trying to tell us that our involvement there is not significant enough to worry about, but also that we’re the only ones standing between the Kurds and certain annihilation.

    Well, which is it? Because it can’t be both.

    Our supposedly small-scale, small-footprint military presence in Northern Syria can’t possibly be enough to keep the full might of the Ottoman–sorry, Turkish–army from devouring the Kurds, right?

    Something doesn’t add up.

    Ukraine Story Shows Deep State Still Desperately Trying to Take Down Trump

    You didn’t think they’d just give up after their Russian Collusion story went down in flames, did you?

    Of course not. Anti-Trump (or more accurately, Anti-You) bureaucrats in the federal government, particularly the intelligence community, are still persisting in their efforts to overturn the result of the 2016 election nearly three years after the fact.

    The latest attempt, which I discussed last week, has to do with Trump and a phone conversation he had with the President of Ukraine in late July.

    Well, the real, actual scandal has to do with Joe Biden’s dealings in Ukraine, but the Democrats are focused on Trump’s attempts to investigate and expose Joe Biden’s corrupt dealings in Ukraine, and so that, rather than Biden’s blatant corruption, is what everyone’s talking about.

    In other words, the Democrats are trying to impeach Trump for making efforts to expose a crime and then elect the guy who committed the crime itself.

    Yeah, I know.

    As ridiculous and obviously made-up as this whole “story” may seem to you and I, the media’s obsessive coverage of it has helped it blow up to the point where a lot of “normies” out there are buzzing about “impeachment.” In my experiences over the past week or so, people whom I’ve never heard talk about politics prior to this were talking about “impeachment.” They have absolutely no idea why Trump is supposedly about to be run out of office, but they’re aware of the impeachment talk.

    But while the conversation is mostly centered on Democrats’ calls for impeachment, it’s important to detail just how this fiasco came together, because it wasn’t an accident.

    The media coverage, and Democrat Politicians’ public grandstanding, are only the end results of a deeper and very deliberate process that begins with the intelligence community, which remains vital in tee’ing up Democrat politicians’ calls for impeachment in the Trump Era. Just as with the intelligence community’s dirty tricks in concocting the Russiagate story.

    Here’s the general outline: Intelligence community operatives feed phony stories about Trump to the media, the media amplifies the phony stories and dishonestly frames them to reflect as negatively as possible on Trump, and then the Democratic politicians take it from there.

    The Ukraine story, for example, originated from a “whistleblower” in the CIA. A John Brennan acolyte, no doubt.

    The incomparable Victor Davis Hanson summarizes the “whistleblower’s” account:

    “In the complaint are all the now-familiar tell-tale signs of pseudo-exactness, in the form of Mueller-report-like footnotes and page references to liberal media outlets such as Bloomberg, ABC, and the New York Times. There is the accustomed Steele-dossier scare bullet points. We see again Comey-memo-like disputes over classification status with capital letters UNCLASSIFIED stamped as headers and footers and TOP SECRET lined out.

    Scary references abound to the supposed laws that the legal-eagle whistleblower believes were violated. In sum, there is all the usual evidence of an administrative-state bureaucrat, likely to be some third-tier Brennan or Clapper-like intelligence operative, who is canvassing disgruntled White House staffers, writing a report that imitates intelligence-department formats, combing the Internet, in “dream-team” and “all-star” footnote fashion, for scare quotes and anti-Trump stories, and then likely having it dressed up in legalese by an activist lawyer. Take all that away, and one is left with “I heard.”

    Personally, I have no interest in dissecting and analyzing the “complaint” form because to do so would only lend it legitimacy and solidify the perception that it ought to be taken seriously. If you want to read more about the nitty gritty details of the complaint, by all means check out other honest and MAGA-aligned sites as I’m sure there’s no shortage of high-quality point-by-point analyses and rebuttals. But in my view it’s completely unnecessary to do so with a story that should be dismissed out of hand and not taken seriously at all.

    Because what, exactly, are we talking about here? What’s the crux of the issue?

    It’s that Trump wants to investigate Biden’s corruption in the Ukraine, and Democrats are desperate to prevent that from happening. Biden’s crackhead son was somehow making $50k a month from a Ukrainian oil company, and when a government prosecutor there tried to investigate the obvious corruption going on, Vice President Biden himself personally intervened and threatened to withhold $1 billion of aid money to Ukraine until the prosecutor going after his son’s company was fired–which he was.

    Do not be distracted by these ridiculous claims about Trump’s “abuse of power.” Investigating real, actual crimes is not an abuse of power, even if the crimes were committed by Democrats.

    Beyond that, though, the origin of this “whistleblower report” is all the information you need to know not to believe a single word of it.

    After all, this story comes from the CIA, an organization which specializes in overthrowing governments, spreading disinformation and conducting horrible human experiments like MK-Ultra. What, you think they wouldn’t do that stuff to us? Of course they would. John Brennan has made it perfectly clear that the CIA despises not only Donald Trump but the people who made Trump president. You think the CIA has any loyalty at all to the American people? Not a chance.

    I’ve said it before but it bears repeating: the entire intelligence community–not just the leadership but also the “rank and file” we’re constantly told is comprised of patriotic Americans who are sadly given a bad name by their corrupt superiors–is out of control. The IC–thousands of government bureaucrats whose names we’ve largely never heard and whom we never voted into power–decided nearly three years ago that America made the wrong choice in the 2016 election, and so they have been working tirelessly since then to overturn it.

    When Chuck Schumer famously warned Trump in late 2016 that the IC has “six ways from Sunday to get back at you,” this Ukraine whistleblower story is exactly what he was talking about. As was the whole Russian Collusion Hoax we were caught up in for two-and-a-half years.

    And so this is why in my view the simple fact that this “whistleblower” is from the CIA is more than enough reason to believe this whole story is fraudulent and malicious. Just scroll through former CIA Director John Brennan’s insane Twitter ravings and you’ll see why the CIA is never again to be trusted. That madman has wrecked the credibility of the whole department for a generation minimum. Comey has done the same for the FBI.

    This “whistleblower” is the new Peter Strzok, or Christopher Steele, or Andrew McCabe–take your pick. The Ukraine “whistleblower” is the latest in a long line of formerly anonymous IC officials who are trying to overthrow the duly-elected President. When the identity of this “whistleblower” is finally revealed, his name will go down along with all the rest as another Deep State co-conspirator.

    But here’s the best part of it all, the smoking gun which confims all this to be a giant scam: just last month, the intelligence community changed the rules regarding whistleblowers, removing the requirement that they have first-hand witnessing of wrongdoing. Sean Davis of The Federalist just reported this on Friday, and its significance can’t be overstated:

    “Between May 2018 and August 2019, the intelligence community secretly eliminated a requirement that whistleblowers provide direct, first-hand knowledge of alleged wrongdoings. This raises questions about the intelligence community’s behavior regarding the August submission of a whistleblower complaint against President Donald Trump. The new complaint document no longer requires potential whistleblowers who wish to have their concerns expedited to Congress to have direct, first-hand knowledge of the alleged wrongdoing that they are reporting.

    The brand new version of the whistleblower complaint form, which was not made public until after the transcript of Trump’s July 25 phone call with the Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky and the complaint addressed to Congress were made public, eliminates the first-hand knowledge requirement and allows employees to file whistleblower complaints even if they have zero direct knowledge of underlying evidence and only “heard about [wrongdoing] from others.”

    And then, lo and behold, a whistleblower without first-hand evidence, brings this completely fake Ukraine story to light.

    Why suddenly change the rules so that anyone in government who so much as heads a rumor can be a “whistleblower” now, if not to make it easier to fabricate stories like this?

    This anonymous CIA operative now considered a “whistleblower” wouldn’t have been able to qualify for that title a few months ago.

    Seems awfully convenient. But of course the media will try to keep this quiet. The whistleblower’s credibility isn’t supposed to be the story, damnit!

    As I wrote last week about the Ukraine story, this isn’t only the latest in a long line of desperate, impulsive attempts to Get The Orange Man–there’s more to it than that. A major part of it is ass-covering for Joe Biden: the political establishment must not allow Trump to investigate Biden’s crimes in Ukraine.

    Greta Thunberg is Media-Manufactured Propaganda

    First the media employed David Hogg to scream at us about how we need to disarm For The Kids, now they’re using a 16-year-old Swedish kid named Greta Thunberg to guilt us into Taking Action™️ against Climate Change (which isn’t real), also For The Kids.

    Hogg was an insufferable brat, but this Thunberg kid is something different.

    There’s something deeply creepy about her:

    Right off the bat, my first thought is that there’s no way this weird girl appeals to any significant number of people. She’s not charismatic at all, and I think most people would agree she’s pretty creepy with her constantly-on-the-verge-of-tears, Super Duper Impassioned act.

    I’m just not buying it. It’s just not convincing to me. 

    She’s either an actor or she’s been badly brainwashed by cruel adults who hope to use her to push the climate change angle of the assault on Western Civilization. “Don’t reproduce because Greta Thunberg says so!”

    It’s probably both.

    But again, I just don’t see the appeal of this girl. It feels put-on, contrived.

    I can’t see any way in which she became this popular naturally and on her own. I don’t hear any normies talking about her.

    Which means if there’s no organic support for her, it must be a propaganda operation. She did not become this big of a figure on her own.

    But sure enough, the media is treating her as if she’s an organic viral sensation.

    This is one of those all-too-common scenarios where the media coverage is the tail attempting to wag the dog of public opinion: she’s not receiving tons of media coverage because people are buzzing about her–instead, she’s being shoved down our throats by the media in order to push an agenda on us.

    It’s important to recognize when this is happening, because these days it’s most of the time. People need to stop and ask themselves why, all of the sudden, every legacy media outlet is bombarding us with nearly identical “coverage” of this creepy Swedish teenager. It’s deliberate.

    They’re rarely just “covering the news” or reporting on what’s happening. Instead, they’re creating the news, and selectively informing us only on what they want us to pay attention to–even if they have to create the story themselves.

    The media did it with Barack Obama in 2008, turning him into a worldwide phenomenon and eventually US President. Their nonstop positive (and positive is a major understatement) coverage of Obama was what made him so popular.

    This is what they’re doing with Greta Thunberg, only on a smaller scale. It should be obvious by now that it’s a faux-viral story coordinated by the biggest names in the legacy media:

    werqwerqwerqwer.PNG

    CNN even ran a column by a former Obama State Department PR official:

    adsfjadsflj;kafdslj;kfdsa.PNG

    Rolling Stone was on the same page:

    agrwewegqweag.PNG

    The coordination is so obvious. “Powerful.” “Unforgettable.” “Passionate.”

    The media makes Greta Thunberg important by “covering” her non-stop, and then the media continues to cover her because she’s important. It’s Fake News from beginning to end. At no point was there any organic origin here.

    The whole Greta Thunberg thing feels like an elaborate PR operation foisted upon us by wealthy, powerful liberal elites. It’s Astroturfing 101.

    So I want to know:

    • Who funded her trip and her tour of America?
    • How did she get to meet Obama?

    adsffdsdsafadsfdsafdsaf.PNG

    • How did she get to give a speech at the UN?
    • How was she allowed to testify before Congress, as if a 16-year-old from Sweden’s “insight” is somehow unique and valuable to lawmakers in America?
    • Why is her face all over the media?

    If I had to guess, I’d say Soros is behind it.

    Some are already suggesting this, and this photo has been circulating:

    gdflkjadfdafksljdsf.PNG

    This woman, Luisa-Marie Neubauer, who is frequently pictured with Thunberg and appears to be her handler or something like that, works for the “ONE Foundation,” which is rumored to be run by Bill Gates, Bono and yes, George Soros.

    But my own research hasn’t turned up any definitive proof of this, so I cannot report it with certainty.

    Still, I don’t doubt that Soros is behind all this.

    And finally, why is Thunberg (or, rather, her handlers) wasting time in the US? China is far and away the world’s biggest polluter and carbon emitter. In fact carbon emissions in the US have gone down over the past 20 years:

    EFLz9YBXkAAbFsm.jpg

    Why doesn’t Greta Thunberg go yell at China and India to stop reproducing and to give up all their sovereignty to the UN?

    Because the people shoving her down our throats don’t want control of China and India, they want control of America and Europe.

     

     

    SHOWDOWN: 374 Years of Legal Precedent vs. A Silly Poem on the Statue of Liberty

    According to the media, the “Give me your tired. . .” poem on the Statue of Liberty is the be-all, end-all of American immigration policy, so authoritative and unquestionable it might as well be part of the Constitution (even though the media doesn’t much care for the Constitution).

    That’s why Ken Cuccinelli, the acting director of the Citizenship and Immigration Office, recently got himself into trouble with CNN’s Erin Burnett–for daring to question the holy dogma of THE POEM establishing America as the world’s homeless shelter:

    “Erin Burnett was not going to let Ken Cuccinelli off the hook for his despicable rewrite of Emma Lazarus’ poem on the Statue of Liberty. Instead, she pinned him to the wall and watched him squirm like a worm on a hook.

    There was a back and forth where he ultimately accused her of “twisting this like everybody else on the left has done all day today.” That accusation simply prompted her to bring receipts.

    “You’re saying — it’s important — you’re saying it’s important to stand on your own two feet,” she said. Cuccinelli agreed with that.

    Burnett then informed him (again) that the poem did not say that, and again he deflected, first blaming the NPR reporter for bringing it up (how dare they?) and then Burnett.”

    THE POEM DOES NOT SAY THAT, BIGOT!

    “She was having no part of his little dance, coming back to bring her receipts, after repeating how he had bastardized the poem to be one for ugly xenophobes instead of an inspiring invitation.

    “However it came up, you said, ‘Give me your tired and poor who can stand on their own two feet, not become a public charge,” she reiterated.

    Again, he agreed, unapologetically.

    “The poem reads, ‘give me your tired your poor huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore, Send these, the homeless tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!’ Wretched refuse. That’s what the poem says America is supposed to stand for. So what do you think America stands for?” she asked.”

    Replace the word “poem” with “Bible” and CNN’s Erin Burnett is no different from a religious zealot.

    Cuccinelli’s response:

    “Well, of course that poem referred back to people coming from Europe where they had class-based societies. Where people were considered wretched if they weren’t in the right class. And it was introduced — it was written one year — one year after the first federal public charge rule was written that says — I’ll quote it — any person unable to take care of himself without becoming a public charge, unquote, would be inadmissible in the terms that my agency deals with, they can’t do what’s called adjusting status getting a green card becoming legal permanent residents. Same exact time, Erin, same exact time. And the year is went on the statue of liberty, 1903, another federal law was passed expanding the elements of public charge by Congress. This is a — this is a central part.”

    Decent response by Cuccinelli, but he is under no obligation to try to interpret the poem in a way that bolsters his stance on immigration.

    The poem is pro-open borders, period.

    But that’s okay because we are not under any obligation to agree with it or live according to its message.

    We don’t have to care what Emma Lazarus thinks about immigration.

    Anytime we talk about immigration, open borders propagandists like Erin Burnett will screech “BUT THE POEM! THE POEM SAYS!”

    But who cares? Not me.

    The important thing Ken Cuccinelli brought up was the “Public Charge” law, enacted one year before Lazarus’ stupid poem was affixed to the Statue of Liberty, which denies immigration to Lazarus’ exalted “wretched refuse” of other countries–i.e. immigrants who can’t take care of themselves and who are a drain on taxpayers.

    Cuccinelli, who is spearheading the Trump administration’s effort to, not even enact but merely resume enforcement of, the “public charge” laws already on the books, has real legal precedent on his side. Erin Burnett has a stupid poem on her’s.

    In fact, Ken Cuccinelli and the Trump administration have 374 years of legal precedent on their side when it comes to public charge laws.

    The first one was enacted in 1645 in the Massachusetts Bay Colony:

    “The English colony of Massachusetts enacted the earliest American public charge laws in 1645. The arrival in the colonies of undesirables spurred other colonies to enact similar laws. “By the end of the seventeenth century American colonists were especially reluctant to extend a welcome to impoverished foreigners and the ‘Rogues and vagabonds’ that England had so graciously decided she could spare.” Many colonies protected themselves against public charges through such measures as mandatory reporting of ship passengers, immigrant screening and exclusion upon arrival of designated “undesirables,” and requiring bonds for potential public charges.

    For example, a law enacted in colonial Massachusetts in 1700 kept out the infirm who had no security against becoming public charges. The law required ship captains to post bonds for “lame, impotent, or infirm” passengers who were “incapable of maintaining themselves.” The bond requirement sought to prevent the new arrival from becoming reliant on public relief. Without a bond from the captain, the vessel had to return the person to his home country.

    New York adopted a law in 1691 that required an immigrant to have “a visible Estate” or “a manual occupation” or “give sufficient surety, that he shall not be a burden or charge to the respective places, he shall come to Inhabit.” Delaware in 1740 sought to exclude potential public charges, including “any such infant, lunatick [sic], aged, maimed, impotent or vagrant person;” the colony thus enacted a law whose title was to “Prevent Poor and Impotent Persons [from] being Imported.” Following American independence, states either automatically continued to enforce colonial-era public charge laws or reaffirmed those laws.”

    Since the very beginning of this country, we have sought to avoid being saddled with unproductive burdens via immigration.

    We don’t want immigrants coming here to take advantage of our public services.

    It is not our side who are the radicals attempting to go against the American tradition on immigration.

    It is instead the open borders globalists of the past 20-30 years who have decided to reverse centuries of American immigration policy in order to flood the country with poor third-worlders.

    We are under no obligation to care what their stupid poem says.