Censorship is antithetical to the scientific method because it requires free speech and open debate and skepticism

Vivek Ramaswamy is the author of “Woke Inc.” He spent a long career in business and has taken a break from that because he thinks the country is in trouble, not least because of things like this. Vivek, thanks so much for joining us tonight. We appreciate it.

So, what should we make — what lesson should we draw when politicians exempt themselves from their own rules? When Barack Obama has his guests, 500 guests and 200 servants to his oceanfront home in Martha’s Vineyard at a time when the rest of us aren’t allowed to do that — what should we learn from that?

VIVEK RAMASWAMY, BIOTECH ENTREPRENEUR AND AUTHOR, “WOKE, INC.”: We should learn, Tucker, that the guiding principle is, “Do as I say, not as I do,” when it comes to government officials policy on COVID-19. It is funny, it reminds me a lot of a white-collar criminal in the 1980s, Leona Helmsley who famously said, “We don’t pay taxes, only little people pay taxes.”

Well today, only little people are the ones who are expected to abide by these COVID-19 restrictions. It is laughable if the consequences weren’t so serious and the government has given the public absolutely zero reason to trust anything they have to say, Tucker.

The government did not trust the public at the start of this pandemic and now, the public doesn’t trust the government in return and that’s a problem.

CARLSON: Well, it is a problem particularly in public health. I mean, you’ve been in public health. You ran a pharma company, a successful one developing new drug treatments for disease. If the public doesn’t believe physicians or public health authorities, like what kind of country do you have over time?

RAMASWAMY: That’s absolutely right, and now we see the censorship to top it off. I’ll tell you this, Tucker. I was a Harvard trained scientist. I started a biotech company. I care about the integrity of science and science is not what some government official says on a given day depending on what side of the bed he woke up on.

Science is a method. It is a method of pursuing truth that requires free speech, open debate, and skepticism. Yes, skepticism is part of science and instead, science — we’ve seen science transform into becoming this institution. I think of it as a church, what I call the church of scientism.

And ironically, the church of scientism has put science itself on the altar as a sacrificial lamb. What we really need is a revival of the open discourse that allows us to discover what of our ideas will be proven wrong in the future, and without open debate, without open dialogue, we can’t do that.

CARLSON: And isn’t that why — I mean, you would know, since you started a biotech company, but the United States has led the world in scientific innovation for a hundred years because it is the most open country.

RAMASWAMY: That’s right. I mean, we have to be humble about what we do know and what we don’t. History teaches us that most of our beliefs will either be proven false or modified in some way, but the only way we get there is not through censorship, it is not through government government- coordinated censorship with these so-called private companies, but through open discourse, and honesty, and humility, and skepticism. That is what science depends on.

And now, in the name of science, the worst kind of betrayal of science, Tucker, is in the name of science itself and that’s what we’re seeing.

CARLSON: That’s totally right. Humility is the root of wisdom and it is the root of science, and thank you for reminding us of that. Vivek Ramaswamy, great to see you tonight.

RAMASWAMY: Thanks, Tucker.

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

FBI CIA NSA are not only spying on American citizens but also are illegally unmasking their identities to journalists who support our fascist government

Well, a media outlet called “The Record,” which is owned by a cybersecurity company recently published a story about the N.S.A.’s monitoring of this show, effectively admitting that it happened. Our identity, “The Record” said was included in an Intel intercept and then quote, “unmasked.”

Intercepted — “The Record” rather did not explain how that would be legal, but it happened as we said it did.

Glenn Greenwald is an independent journalist. You can read him and you should on “Substack,” which is an unfiltered and uncontrolled website for people who are independent.

Glenn, thanks so much for coming on tonight. So, unmasked.

Why in the world would the U.S. government be unmasking journalists, particularly ones who are critical of them?

GLENN GREENWALD, JOURNALIST: Yes, I’m sorry, I’m trying to keep myself composed after that emotional footage you played about Congressman Kinzinger —

CARLSON: I’m sorry. And I’m sorry. I am sorry, I didn’t, you know —

GREENWALD: But that is, I think — yes, I mean, you should have given me a warning. I’m really on the verge of tears myself here after having heard that.

CARLSON: Sorry.

GREENWALD: You know, I think the critical question is exactly what you just asked, which is — let’s remember that the fundamental principle is that the N.S.A. is not supposed to be using its spying powers on American citizens unless it gets a warrant, which obviously didn’t have with regard to you.

Sometimes though, they do find out things that you’re doing or saying if you’re for example talking to somebody who they are spying on or people they’re spying on are talking about things you said or done, and when that happens, there are supposed to be protections in place for American citizens. They are supposed to hide your identity so that your privacy isn’t invaded, which is what happens when they learn things that you’re doing without a warrant.

In limited circumstances, they have the right to unmask the identity of the American citizen who appears in their record and then disseminate it through the Intelligence Community. For example, if they listen to people saying we want to kill Journalist A, of course they would want to unmask it to warn the journalist that they’re being targeted. None of that happened here.

And yet, where is the media complaining about that “The Washington Post” actually published a story by their media critic, Erik Wemple who has no experience reporting on surveillance justifying that the N.S.A. did this and claiming that you have no grounds for complaining about it. What conceivable justification is there, Tucker, for the N.S.A. to have gone and said, we want to know this journalist’s name who is trying to get an interview with Vladimir Putin?

And the reason the media doesn’t care, and in fact supports the N.S.A. is because they’re on the side of the Intelligence Community and are very happy when those powers are abused for ideological ends against their ideological enemy, which I’m sorry to say includes you.

CARLSON: Well, that’s exactly what it was. I mean, they spread to news outlets that I was talking to Russians in an effort to discredit and then control me. Of course, that’s the point. That’s why we don’t allow it.

So, I want to get your reaction, speaking of Federal powers that may be abused. BuzzFeed reported that most of the people involved in that famous plot, right before the election, to kidnap the Governor of Michigan, Gretchen Whitmer were in fact working for the F.B.I. You’ve covered a lot of these stories over the years. Were you surprised by that — most of them were working for the F.B.I.?

GREENWALD: You know, I think that as Americans, we are trained — and I know, even after all the reporting I’ve done to kind of reflexively disbelieve that the F.B.I. could do something like involve itself in a plot and then either encourage it or allow it. We all have that kind, no, that wouldn’t have happened.

But what I’m telling you is, I spent a decade during the first war on terror — this is the second war on terror — reporting in one case after the next where the F.B.I. would say, we caught four young Muslims plotting to blow up a bridge, and in almost every case, it turned out that these four young Muslims were not very smart, we’re emotionally unstable, we’re financially vulnerable, and the only plot that was created was one that was created by the F.B.I. that brought it to them and then used their knowhow of psychological manipulation to lure them into it.

The informants who were paid would do everything possible to get them to agree to it, then the F.B.I. would announce, oh we found this plot that was actually the F.B.I.’s plot in the first place.

CARLSON: That’s right.

GREENWALD: So, the only unanswered question that that committee should be asking, instead of in between all the sobbing and weeping and stuff is, what role did the F.B.I. have in terms of being embedded in the three groups they claim plotted this attack on the Capitol? And did they purposely allow it to go forward? Because as the F.B.I. has admitted, we need the citizenry in fear in order to increase our budget, in order to increase our surveillance authorities.

And the one relevant question about January 6th that hasn’t been answered is the one that the media and the Congress has declared off limits to ask.

CARLSON: Boy, they hate it, and in fact, Republican Members of Congress were given instructions by their leaders not to push the F.B.I. on this, which is just mind-blowing, but we should push. I think, we should, and thank you for doing it.

Glenn Greenwald of “Substack.” Great to see you.

GREENWALD: Good talking to you, Tucker.

FBI CIA NSA are not only spying on American citizens but also are illegally unmasking their identities to journalists who support our fascist government

William Brighenti, CPA
http://www.cpa-connecticut.com

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The government is instructing social media companies what shouldn’t be allowed to be on the internet even though these companies are the least competent to judge what is misinformation

The left-wing media is trying to silence the right-wing media and censor free speech

And the attempt to restrict what information you’re allowed to see is now coming from the highest office in the land.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BIDEN: My hope is that Facebook – instead of taking it personally – that somehow I’m saying Facebook is killing people, that they would do something about the misinformation – the outrageous misinformation – about the vaccine.

JEN PSAKI, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: –shouldn’t be banned from one platform and not others, if you are for providing misinformation out there.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Here now a Pulitzer Prize winning and Independent Journalist Glenn Greenwald. Glenn, the biggest shock here – I don’t think it’s – that the modern Left thinks they can use this social media companies as their own not truth squads. But that the media seems to be just like whistling past the graveyard on this. Your thoughts?

GLENN GREENWALD, INDEPENDENT JOURNALIST: Well, I mean, I think the model was set when just weeks before the election, the Silicon Valley giants united to ban reporting done by “The New York Post” on authentic documents about the Biden family. And the media didn’t raise any concerns. In fact, they supported it.

And that sent the signal that the Biden Administration, once they’re in power, could use that model of suppressing information off of the internet with very little objection from the people who are supposed to defend free expression.

And the thing that’s so amazing, Laura, is even if you’re somebody who isn’t incredibly disturbed by the idea that the government is instructing social media companies what should and shouldn’t be allowed to be on the internet, these are the people least competent to judge what is misinformation.

They’re the ones who spent a year saying that the theory of a COVID lab leak in Wuhan was a crazy conspiracy theory, and now they say it’s highly plausible. Worse, these are the same people who flooded the country for five years with deranged conspiracy theories that Putin and the Russians had taken control over the U.S. through clandestine sexual blackmail. And now suddenly, they want to act like we should trust them to determine what is true and what is false. It’s incredibly dangerous now.

INGRAHAM: Like they haven’t been operating a bureau of disinformation on a multitude of issues, as I pointed out in THE ANGLE. I mean, again, when NPR, Glenn, writes an article about Ben Shapiro’s site, “The Daily Wire,” in this thing, they quoted Jamie Settle, Director of the Social Networks and Political Psychology Lab at William & Mary.

And she said that, “they tend to not provide very much context for the information they’re providing. If you’ve stripped enough context away any piece of truth can become a piece of misinformation.” Glenn, you can see where this is going.

GREENWALD: Yes. I mean, I think, the reality of what’s going on is that these media outlets are losing their audience. Trump was kind of like a four year sugar high for them. He saved their jobs, and with him gone, their audiences collapsing. There’s data today is showing that “The Atlantic,” “The New York Times,” “The Guardian,” “Huffington Post,” have all lost between a third and half of their audience in the last year alone.

Obviously, the other two cable networks combined don’t get anywhere near the audience of this network. And so they look at Ben Shapiro and other Right Wing voices, and they’re angry that more people want to listen to them than to these corporate media outlets.

And so their only option, instead of looking in the mirror and asking why people don’t want to listen to them, is to try and just silence everybody so that they maintain their monopoly over the discourse, and everyone is captive to listen to them, because everyone else has been silenced. And that’s really all it’s about.

INGRAHAM: I want to get back to a point that I had made a few minutes ago. How did the Democrats – let’s say, it’s mostly happening right now on the Democrat side? How do they think it’s actually going to help them? It’s like none of these questions, whether it’s about kids and masks or any of these questions are, they’re not going to go away. Right.

So next year in the midterms, the questions are still going to be out there and it’s better to run themselves through the paces of tough interviews tough – I mean, fair interviews, these questions. But instead of when you ask a question, you raise a point – a data point, then you’re a vaccine denier, you’re anti-science, you have to be stopped, it’s disinformation.

I have never seen anything like this since I lived in the Soviet Union as a student in the 1980s. Glenn.

GREENWALD: It’s the same mentality. I think it goes back to the 2016 campaign when they were not really so sure that Hillary Clinton was going to defeat Donald Trump, but believe they had some kind of like divine entitlement for Hillary Clinton to become president.

And when they lost, fair and square, they started asking themselves, why did we lose. And instead of looking at the mirror,. again, they started blaming everybody except themselves. And especially they started blaming Facebook, saying you allowed all this disinformation, you allowed lies about Hillary Clinton.

And our only option to survive politically, is to control the means of communication that we no longer control, which is the internet. That was the whole point of the internet – was to liberate us from not having to be manipulated and controlled by centralized authority.

When they saw that allowing that freedom jeopardizes their political interest, the only conclusion that they reach was, we can’t allow that anymore. We can’t allow this freedom. We need to control it, we need to silence it, we need to censor it, and through the Trump years it just escalated. And they’re like this authoritarian faction now that genuinely believes that censorship is in the public good.

INGRAHAM: Yes, it is. Glenn, we’re going to keep tracking it. Thank you. Great to see you tonight.

The government is instructing social media companies what shouldn’t be allowed to be on the internet even though these companies are the least competent to judge what is misinformation

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Our government is using Big Tech companies to circumvent the First Amendment and censor free speech on its behalf

Jon Scott: Critics are calling the White House’s push to stop Covid19 misinformation on social media another example of big tech censorship. Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy said today companies like Facebook have to do more.

Vivek Murthy: But what I’ve also said to them publicly and privately is that it’s not enough. That we are still seeing a proliferation of misinformation online. And we know that health misinformation harms people’s health. It costs them their lives.”

Jon Scott: Our next guest recently argued in a Wall Street Journal op-ed quote: “Google, Facebook and Twitter should be treated as state actors under existing legal doctrines. Using a combination of statutory inducements and regulatory threats, Congress has co-opted Silicon Valley to do through the back door what government cannot directly accomplish under the Constitution”

The author of those words, Vivek Ramaswamy. He is a biotech entrepreneur and the author of “Woke Inc.: Inside Corporate America’s Social Justice Scam.” Uh, to the subtitle of the book first, Vivek, what do you mean “social justice scam”?

Vivek Ramaswamy: Yeah well look, what I mean is that companies use the illusion of caring about something other than the pursuit of profit and power precisely to gain more profit and power. That is how the game of 21st century capitalism is played. It dupes consumers it dupes regulators, and it dupes the public at large to allow companies to accomplish their own objective but leave the American citizenry worse off in the end.

Jon Scott: Well, is Facebook an example for instance of that kind of thinking?

Vivek Ramaswamy: Yeah, Facebook is an example of it. I would put all of social media in this category, too, where there is an effective unspoken backroom deal with progressives in the Democratic Party to say that we are going to now use our corporate power as a weapon to silence content that you disagree with. But effectively we in Silicon Valley don’t do it for free. We expect you, the government, to look the other way when it comes to leaving our monopoly power intact. And I’m sorry to say that it is working masterfully for both sides.

And it’s an incestuous relationship that now goes in both directions because that’s what government has begun to realize is they can use these private companies to do indirectly through the back door what the government could not directly do through the front door under the Constitution. And that is what we are seeing with the essence of big tech censorship today to say that the First Amendment clearly prohibits the government from doing it directly so the government has found an extra constitutional measure through its fourth branch of government in Silicon Valley to effectuate censorship that the government couldn’t directly and I think that is actually the most dangerous form of censorship of all because the public doesn’t recognize it for what it is.

Jon Scott: Okay but you just heard the Surgeon General say that misinformation on outlets like Facebook is costing people their lives. We want to save lives, don’t we?

Vivek Ramaswamy: Of course we do. But look, I think the answer to misinformation and to bad speech is not less speech, it is more speech. And I think there’s both a cultural point and a legal point.

On the cultural point, the thing I would say is every dictatorship through human history has had its excuse for why it wanted to censor speech. Misinformation is the excuse of today. But people said the same thing. Now they say social media is unique. Well people said the same thing about the telephone. People said the same thing about the advent of radio. People said the same thing about the advent of television. Everyone thought their moment was unique when they were arguing for censorship in the past. It is no different today. The road still ends to the same place which is totalitarian dictatorship.

But the good news is we have strong legal doctrines in this country which say that even if you deputize a private company to do what the government can’t do. that is still a violation of the Constitution. And that’s why I argued that these companies ought to be treated as state actors and bound by the First Amendment when they engage in selective political censorship. And I think that’s what President Trump’s case has the potential to do by the way.

Jon Scott: The spokeswoman for the current President, Jen Psaki, was talking about the fact that the

Biden administration has been leaning on Facebook to silence what she calls misinformation. Senator Ted Cruz says that her point actually helped former President Trump. Listen.

Ted Cruz: Her press conference strengthened President Trump’s lawsuit against big tech. It makes clear that everything we thought about the Biden administration, about their willingness to trample on free speech, to trample on the Constitution, to use government power to silence you, everything we feared they might do, they are doing, and worse.

Jon Scott: Is he accurate in that assessment?

Vivek Ramaswamy: Senator Cruz and I actually exchanged messages after my op-ed came out on Monday. He’s absolutely right. I think that’s exactly the point I made in my op-ed on Monday. When I wrote on Monday that the government was using these companies through the back door to do what it couldn’t do directly, people said that was a conspiracy theory. Well apparently the difference between a conspiracy theory and reality today is as short as four days because we just saw Jen Psaki on Thursday and then on Friday bragging, boasting, about exactly what the government was directing Facebook to do in taking down misinformation, saying that if you were banned from one social media company, you should be banned from all of the social media platforms.

And so she is now making the case for state action even better than I did in my couple of Wall Street Journal editorials. But the point is the government today is boasting about using social media companies to effectuate its objectives. That is actually the biggest violation of the Constitution of all and I think that’s the case that President Trump is effectively trying to make. I think he has room to make it better in the complaint that he’s filed but that’s effectively the heart of his claim is that when the government dispatches private companies with threats, with voluntary willful coordination between the government and these private companies, and also with the special form of immunity in the form of Section 230 immunity, any one of those could be the basis for state action using Supreme Court doctrines. Here we have all three.  I think it may be the most egregious case of state action in the guise of private enterprise that we’ve seen in modern history.

Jon Scott: Okay, very quickly, but on a micro level, I mean there are millions of people watching right now, who are also Facebook users, what do you say to them about your concerns about the government leaning on that company?

Vivek Ramaswamy: If it can happen to the 45th president of the United States it can happen to anybody. This is not an academic issue and it is not a political or partisan issue. If they can do it to the right today, they can do it to the left tomorrow. These are the most powerful companies we’ve seen in the course of human history.  Even the Dutch East India Company had a private militia but it couldn’t control the bounds of acceptable debate.

And it’s not just the power of these companies alone that matters. When it’s co-mingled with the state, when big business mixes with big government, that creates the biggest threat of all, what I call the woke industrial complex, because each of big business and big government can do what the other cannot and that’s a threat to liberty whether you’re a Republican or whether you’re Democrat, whether you’re black or white, every American ought to be concerned. And I think that’s where the new solutions for both the movements on the left and on the right need to focus going forward.

Jon Scott: His new book is “Woke Incorporated.” Vivek Ramaswamy the author. Thank you, interesting.

Vivek Ramaswamy: Thank you.

Our government is using Big Tech companies to circumvent the First Amendment and censor free speech on its behalf

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The CIA NSA FBI are today’s Gestapo. Didn’t they create a phony Russian investigation to overthrow a Presidency?

TUCKER CARLSON: IN THE MEANTIME, WE’RE HAPPY TO HAVE ONE OF THE VERY FEW PEOPLE IN AMERICAN JOURNALISM WHO UNDERSTOOD EXACTLY WHAT WAS GOING ON LONG BEFORE MOST OF US DID AND WROTE ABOUT IT EXTENSIVELY. GLENN GREENWALD, A FREQUENT GUEST OF THE SHOW, THANKS SO MUCH FOR COMING ON.

I THINK THERE ARE A COUPLE OF LEVELS HERE. I HAVE LEARNED IN THE LAST WEEK THAT IN WASHINGTON THE FACT THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS READING OUR EMAILS IS NO BIG DEAL AND YOU’RE LIKE A NUTCASE FOR EVEN NOTING IT OR BEING BOTHERED BY IT. YOU SHOULD HAVE NO EXPECT TATIAN OF PRIVACY WHATSOEVER. BUT I THINK, AND YOU WOULD KNOW, THE FEDERAL LAW IS PRETTY CLEAR ON THIS.

IF NSA CAPTURES INFORMATION SENT PRIVATELY BY THE AMERICAN CITIZEN THEY HAVE TO KEEP THAT CITIZEN’S IDENTITY SECRET UNLESS THEY GO THROUGH A PROCESS TO “UNMASK” IT. IT SEEMS VERY CLEAR THEY DID EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED TO DO.

GLENN GREENWALD: YEAH. I THINK THERE’S TWO IMPORTANT COMPONENTS.  ONE IS THE FIRST ONE THAT YOU JUST REFERENCED, WHICH IS THAT IF THEY WERE DOING THIS PERFECTLY LEGALLY, MEANING THEY INTERCEPTED YOUR EMAIL COMMUNICATIONS WITH LEGAL AUTHORITY BECAUSE YOU ARE TALKING EITHER TO THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT WHICH THEY OBVIOUSLY ARE ALLOWED TO SPY ON, OR TO A TARGET IN THE UNITED STATES WHO YOU WERE USING AS AN INTERMEDIARY AND THEY LEARNED THAT WAY THAT YOU WERE COMMUNICATING WITH THE RUSSIANS ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF AN INTERVIEW WITH PUTIN, THEY HAVE THE LEGAL OBLIGATION TO CONCEAL YOUR IDENTITY AND MAKE SURE THAT NOBODY KNOWS THAT YOU WERE THE ONE THAT WAS SPEAKING TO THE RUSSIANS. THE INTELLIGENCE THAT THEY CARE ABOUT IS THAT THE RUSSIANS WERE DOING SOMETHING, NOT WITH WHOM THEY WERE SPEAKING.

SO CLEARLY THERE WAS EITHER A FAILURE TO HIDE YOUR IDENTITY AS REQUIRED BY LAW, WHICH IS ILLEGAL, OR AN ATTEMPT TO UNMASK IT AFTER IT WAS MINIMIZED, WHICH ALSO WOULD BE A CRIME GIVEN THAT THERE IS NO NATIONAL SECURITY JUSTIFICATION FOR DOING IT.

THERE’S SOMETHING MUCH MORE SERIOUS, TUCKER, WHICH IS WHEN THE NSA SPIES ON AMERICAN CITIZENS SPEAKING TO FOREIGN NATIONALS AND FOREIGN OFFICIALS, EVEN WHEN IT’S LEGAL, THAT’S A VERY GRAVE POWER. SO THERE ARE REAL LIMITS ON WHAT THEY CAN DO WITH THAT. IT IS ONE OF THE GREATEST CRIMES IN THE U.S. CODE FOR THE NSA TO LEAK THE CONTENTS OF COMMUNICATIONS THAT IT INTERCEPTS BETWEEN A FOREIGN OFFICIAL AND AN AMERICAN CITIZEN.

AND I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT GOT OVERLOOKED IS THAT IN 2017, WHEN GENERAL FLYNN, WHO WAS IN THE CROSSHAIRS OF THE ENTIRE DEEP STATE UNDER OBAMA, WAS SPEAKING WITH AMBASSADOR KISLYAK, THEY LEAKED THE CONTENTS OF THAT COMMUNICATION, INTERCEPTED COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN A RUSSIAN OFFICIAL AND THE INCOMING NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR TO “THE WASHINGTON POST.” IT WAS AS GRAVE OF A CRIME AS IT GETS UNDER THE U.S. CODE TO THIS DAY. NOT ONLY DON’T WE KNOW WHO DID THE LEAKING, NO ONE CARES BECAUSE THEY HATE GENERAL FLYNN, HE’S NOT THEIR IDEOLOGY AND THEREFORE THEY THINK IT’S
JUSTIFIED.

THAT’S THE REACTION HERE. OH, IT’S TUCKER CARLSON, HE’S A CONSERVATIVE, WE DON’T LIKE HIM AND SO WE DON’T EVEN CARE IF THE NSA WAS DOING THIS, BUT IT IS ILLEGAL TO DO EITHER OF THOSE TWO THINGS.

TUCKER CARLSON: AND FLYNN, IT’S NOT AN ATTACK ON FLYNN OR ANYTHING BUT LIKE SO MANY PEOPLE HE WAS UNDER ATTACK AND HE WENT ON THE DEFENSIVE AND THEN HE REMAINED SILENT AND HE DIDN’T ARTICULATE HIS OWN CASE AND MAYBE HIS LAWYERS TOLD HIM NOT TO OR SOMETHING, BUT IF YOU WERE PERSISTENT IN DEMANDING–LOOK, HE’S AN AMERICAN CITIZEN, YOU MAY NOT LIKE MY POLITICS, BUT YOU’RE NOT ALLOWED TO VIOLATE MY RIGHTS AND BREAK THE LAW.

I MEAN, I WONDER IF YOU COULD FORCE THEM TO ADMIT WHAT HAPPENED AND THEN YOU COULD FORCE SOME ACCOUNTABILITY. NO ONE IN THESE AGENCIES, BRENNAN, CLAPPER, THEY LIED UNDER OATH BEFORE CONGRESS. WE PLAYED THE TAPE A THOUSAND TIMES. NOBODY CARES, NOBODY DOES ANYTHING. COULD YOU ACTUALLY FORCE THE SYSTEM TO HOLD THESE UNACCOUNTABLE LEADERS ACCOUNTABLE FOR ONCE?

GLENN GREENWALD: THE PROBLEM IS THERE ARE SO MANY DOCTRINES THAT THE… THE SECURITY STATE HAS EXISTED SINCE THE END OF WORLD WAR II. THEY’VE BEEN OPERATING IN SECRET AND WITH NO DEMOCRATIC ACCOUNTABILITY FOR EIGHT OR NINE DECADES NOW. DWIGHT EISENHOWER WHEN HE LEFT OFFICE WARNED THE COUNTRY ABOUT THE DANGERS THAT THEY POSE.

SO MANY TIMES WHEN PEOPLE HAVE GONE TO SUE THE NSA FOR ILLEGALLY SPYING ON THEM THEY HAVE DOCTRINES THAT THEY USE, THEY WILL SAY IT’S TOO SECRET, WE CAN’T HAVE COURTS LOOKING INTO WHAT WE DID, BECAUSE THAT WILL JEOPARDIZE NATIONAL SECURITY. AND THEN COURTS DISMISSED THE LAWSUIT. OR THEY WILL SAY, TUCKER CARLSON CAN’T PROVE THAT WE ACTUALLY SPIED ON HIM, THEREFORE HE HAS NO STANDING TO SUE AND COURTS WILL DISMISS THAT AS WELL.

THE REMEDY HERE IS FOR CONGRESS — IT’S CONGRESS’ RESPONSIBILITY TO EXERCISE OVERSIGHT HOW THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH SPIES ON PEOPLE. AND FOR SO LONG CONGRESS HAS BEEN EITHER AFRAID OF THE NSA AND THE CIA OR WORSE, SUBSERVIENT TO THEM. AND YOU’RE RIGHT, IT HAS BEEN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY ALONG WITH DEMOCRATS THAT HAS LONG VENERATED THESE AGENCIES AND ONLY UNDER TRUMP DID THEY START TO REALIZE ACTUALLY THESE AGENCIES INTERFERE IN OUR POLITICS AND THREATEN OUR DEMOCRACY IN REALLY PERNICIOUS WAYS, AND THAT THEY NEED TO TAKE THAT KNOWLEDGE THAT THEY LEARNED OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS AND USE IT TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF WHAT HAPPENED HERE.

TUCKER CARLSON: SO I SPOKE TO – THIS IS NOT SPECULATION, THIS IS A CONVERSATION I HAD PERSONALLY FACE-TO-FACE WITH SOMEONE I THOUGHT WAS A VERY POWERFUL MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEE THAT OVERSEES THE INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES IN CONGRESS. I CAN’T BE MORE SPECIFIC. THIS IS A TRUE STORY. TWO YEARS AGO TOLD ME TO MY FACE THAT HIS COMMUNICATIONS WERE BEING MONITORED BY THE INTEL AGENCIES, THE ONES THAT HE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE OVERSEEING AND THAT HE DIDN’T DARE TEXT ME BECAUSE HE KNEW THEY WERE READING HIS TEXTS.

AND I THOUGHT TO MYSELF THIS SYSTEM IS COMPLETELY DYSFUNCTIONAL IF THE PERSON WHO IS SUPPOSED TO BE HOLDING THEM ACCOUNTABLE IS AFRAID OF THEM, THEN WHO’S IN CHARGE HERE? IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY ARE.

GLENN GREENWALD: WE LEARNED — THIS IS ONE OF THE BIG SCANDALS OF THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, THAT WHEN THE SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE WAS INVESTIGATING THE CIA AND THEIR ROLE IN THE INTERROGATION PROGRAM AT GUANTANAMO AND ELSEWHERE, JOHN BRENNAN, CIA, SPIED ON THE LEADER OF THAT SENATE INVESTIGATION, WHICH WAS DIANE FEINSTEIN. THE CIA WAS SPYING ON THE SENATE AS THE SENATE WAS INVESTIGATING THE CIA. THE MOST SIGNIFICANT EXCHANGE – I THINK I TALKED ABOUT THIS ON YOUR SHOW BEFORE, WAS THREE DAYS BEFORE TRUMP WAS INAUGURATED, CHUCK SCHUMER WENT ON THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW AND RACHEL MADDOW WAS VERY UPSET THAT TRUMP WAS INSULTING THE CIA BECAUSE SHE LOVES THE CIA AND CHUCK SCHUMER SAID THE THING YOU’RE NOT SUPPOSED TO SAY ALOUD, WHICH IS TRUMP IS BEING STUPID BECAUSE EVERYONE KNOWS THAT IF YOU CHALLENGE THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY, THEY HAVE SIX DIFFERENT WAYS TO SUNDAY TO GET BACK AT YOU AND THAT’S EXACTLY WHAT THEY PROCEEDED TO DO OVER THE NEXT FOUR YEARS IS UNDERMINE HIS ADMINISTRATION.

PEOPLE IN WASHINGTON ARE PETRIFIED OF THE SECURITY STATE AND THAT’S WHY THEY EXIST WITH NO DEMOCRATIC ACCOUNTABILITY.

TUCKER CARLSON: WELL, WE HAVE TO PUSH BACK. IF THEY FIND A METH LAB IN MY BASEMENT, IT’S NOT REAL, JUST SO THAT YOU KNOW. HA, HA. JUST KIDDING, SORT OF. I’VE BEEN WORRIED ABOUT THAT FOR YEARS. GLENN GREENWALD, GREAT TO SEE YOU TONIGHT. THANK YOU.

The CIA NSA FBI are today’s Gestapo. Didn’t they create a phony Russian investigation to overthrow a Presidency?

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

36 tweets by Darryl Cooper aka @MartyrMade on July 8 2021 on why Trump supporters believe the 2020 election was fraudulent

Tucker Carlson: Well, the US presidential election took place a little over eight months ago and even now many people who voted for Donald Trump believed there was something fraudulent about the whole thing. Why do they think that? Well, they have reason to feel that way. Indisputably there was some misconduct at some polling places and vote counting stations and next week on this show we’ll consider the evidence from Fulton County, Georgia in some detail. It’s worth knowing about it.

But it wasn’t just the way that votes were counted or the voting machines that shook people’s faith in our democracy. It was the preceding four years in the way our ruling class behaved during those four years. Yesterday an historian and podcaster called Daryl Cooper wrote a remarkable series of tweets in which he tried to explain why so many Trump voters believe the last election was rigged. Really smart: he crystallized it. We’d like to read some of it now. Quote:

Darryl Cooper: I think I’ve had discussions w/enough Boomer-tier Trump supporters who believe the 2020 election was fraudulent to extract a general theory about their perspective. It is also the perspective of most of the people at the Capitol on 1/6, and probably even Trump himself. 1/x

Most believe some or all of the theories involving midnight ballots, voting machines, etc, but what you find when you talk to them is that, while they’ll defend those positions w/info they got from Hannity or Breitbart or whatever, they’re not particularly attached to them. 2/x

Here are the facts – actual, confirmed facts – that shape their perspective: 1) The FBI/etc spied on the 2016 Trump campaign using evidence manufactured by the Clinton campaign. We now know that all involved knew it was fake from Day 1 (see: Brennan’s July 2016 memo, etc). 3/x

These are Tea Party people. The types who give their kids a pocket Constitution for their birthday and have Founding Fathers memes in their bios. The intel community spying on a presidential campaign using fake evidence (incl forged documents) is a big deal to them. 4/x

Everyone involved lied about their involvement as long as they could. We only learned the DNC paid for the manufactured evidence because of a court order. Comey denied on TV knowing the DNC paid for it, when we have emails from a year earlier proving that he knew. 5/x

This was true with everyone, from CIA Dir Brennan & Adam Schiff – who were on TV saying they’d seen clear evidence of collusion w/Russia, while admitting under oath behind closed doors that they hadn’t – all the way down the line. In the end we learned that it was ALL fake. 6/x

At first, many Trump ppl were worried there must be some collusion, because every media & intel agency wouldn’t make it up out of nothing. When it was clear that they had made it up, people expected a reckoning, and shed many illusions about their gov’t when it didn’t happen. 7/x

We know as fact: a) The Steele dossier was the sole evidence used to justify spying on the Trump campaign, b) The FBI knew the Steele dossier was a DNC op, c) Steele’s source told the FBI the info was unserious, d) they did not inform the court of any of this and kept spying. 8/x

Trump supporters know the collusion case front and back. They went from worrying the collusion must be real, to suspecting it might be fake, to realizing it was a scam, then watched as every institution – agencies, the press, Congress, academia – gaslit them for another year. 9/x

Worse, collusion was used to scare people away from working in the administration. They knew their entire lives would be investigated. Many quit because they were being bankrupted by legal fees. The DoJ, press, & gov’t destroyed lives and actively subverted an elected admin. 10/x

This is where people whose political identity was largely defined by a naive belief in what they learned in Civics class began to see the outline of a Regime that crossed all institutional boundaries. Because it had stepped out of the shadows to unite against an interloper. 11/x

GOP propaganda still has many of them thinking in terms of partisan binaries, but A LOT of Trump supporters see that the Regime is not partisan. They all know that the same institutions would have taken opposite sides if it was a Tulsi Gabbard vs Jeb Bush election. 12/x

It’s hard to describe to people on the left (who are used to thinking of gov’t as a conspiracy…Watergate, COINTELPRO, WMD, etc) how shocking & disillusioning this was for people who encourage their sons to enlist in the Army, and hate ppl who don’t stand for the Anthem. 13/x

They could have managed the shock if it only involved the government. But the behavior of the corporate press is really what radicalized them. They hate journalists more than they hate any politician or gov’t official, because they feel most betrayed by them. 14/x

The idea that the press is driven by ratings/sensationalism became untenable. If that were true, they’d be all over the Epstein story. The corporate press is the propaganda arm of the Regime they now see in outline. Nothing anyone says will ever make them unsee that, period. 15/x

This is profoundly disorienting. Many of them don’t know for certain whether ballots were faked in November 2020, but they know for absolute certain that the press, the FBI, etc would lie to them if there was. They have every reason to believe that, and it’s probably true. 16/x

They watched the press behave like animals for four years. Tens of millions of people will always see Kavanaugh as a gang rapist, based on nothing, because of CNN. And CNN seems proud of that. They led a lynch mob against a high school kid. They cheered on a summer of riots. 17/x

They always claimed the media had liberal bias, fine, whatever. They still thought the press would admit truth if they were cornered. Now they don’t. It’s a different thing to watch them invent stories whole cloth in order to destroy regular lives and spark mass violence. 18/x

Time Mag told us that during the 2020 riots, there were weekly conference calls involving, among others, leaders of the protests, the local officials who refused to stop them, and media people who framed them for political effect. In Ukraine we call that a color revolution. 19/x

Throughout the summer, Democrat governors took advantage of COVID to change voting procedures. It wasn’t just the mail-ins (they lowered signature matching standards, etc). After the collusion scam, the fake impeachment, Trump ppl expected shenanigans by now. 20/x

Re: “fake impeachment”, we now know that Trump’s request for Ukraine to cooperate w/the DOJ regarding Biden’s $ activities in Ukraine was in support of an active investigation being pursued by the FBI and Ukraine AG at the time, and so a completely legitimate request. 21/x

Then you get the Hunter laptop scandal. Big Tech ran a full-on censorship campaign against a major newspaper to protect a political candidate. Period. Everyone knows it, all of the Tech companies now admit it was a “mistake” – but, ya know, the election’s over, so who cares? 22/x

Goes w/o saying, but: If the NY Times had Don Jr’s laptop, full of pics of him smoking crack and engaging in group sex, lots of lurid family drama, emails describing direct corruption and backed up by the CEO of the company they were using, the NYT wouldn’t have been banned. 23/x

Think back: Stories about Trump being pissed on by Russian prostitutes and blackmailed by Putin were promoted as fact, and the only evidence was a document paid for by his opposition and disavowed by its source. The NY Post was banned for reporting on true information. 24/x

The reaction of Trump ppl to all this was not, “no fair!” That’s how they felt about Romney’s “binders of women” in 2012. This is different. Now they see, correctly, that every institution is captured by ppl who will use any means to exclude them from the political process. 25/x

And yet they showed up in record numbers to vote. He got 13m more votes than in 2016, 10m more than Clinton got! As election night dragged on, they allowed themselves some hope. But when the four critical swing states (and only those states) went dark at midnight, they knew. 26/x

Over the ensuing weeks, they got shuffled around by grifters and media scam artists selling them conspiracy theories. They latched onto one, then another increasingly absurd theory as they tried to put a concrete name on something very real. 27/x

Media & Tech did everything to make things worse. Everything about the election was strange – the changes to procedure, unprecedented mail-in voting, the delays, etc – but rather than admit that and make everything transparent, they banned discussion of it (even in DMs!). 28/x

Everyone knows that, just as Don Jr’s laptop would’ve been the story of the century, if everything about the election dispute was the same, except the parties were reversed, suspicions about the outcome would’ve been Taken Very Seriously. See 2016 for proof. 29/x

Even the courts’ refusal of the case gets nowhere w/them, because of how the opposition embraced mass political violence. They’ll say, w/good reason: What judge will stick his neck out for Trump knowing he’ll be destroyed in the media as a violent mob burns down his house? 30/x

It’s a fact, according to Time Magazine, that mass riots were planned in cities across the country if Trump won. Sure, they were “protests”, but they were planned by the same people as during the summer, and everyone knows what it would have meant. Judges have families, too. 31/x

Forget the ballot conspiracies. It’s a fact that governors used COVID to unconstitutionally alter election procedures (the Constitution states that only legislatures can do so) to help Biden to make up for a massive enthusiasm gap by gaming the mail-in ballot system. 32/x

They knew it was unconstitutional, it’s right there in plain English. But they knew the cases wouldn’t see court until after the election. And what judge will toss millions of ballots because a governor broke the rules? The threat of mass riots wasn’t implied, it was direct. 33/x

a) The entrenched bureaucracy & security state subverted Trump from Day 1, b) The press is part of the operation, c) Election rules were changed, d) Big Tech censors opposition, e) Political violence is legitimized & encouraged, f) Trump is banned from social media. 34/x

They were led down some rabbit holes, but they are absolutely right that their gov’t is monopolized by a Regime that believes they are beneath representation, and will observe no limits to keep them getting it. Trump fans should be happy he lost; it might’ve kept him alive. /end

As long as you’re here, check out my podcast. The most recent episode was on the Soviet takeover of Eastern Europe. There’s also a series on the early history of the Israeli-Arab conflict, and one on Jim Jones’ Peoples’ Temple movement.

Tucker Carlson:  Quote. That is true and every honest person knows it.

36 tweets by Darryl Cooper aka @MartyrMade on July 8 2021 on why Trump supporters believe the 2020 election was fraudulent

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Blood tests reveal that the Coronavirus COVID-19 originated before September 2019 and China knew and hid its origins


Tucker Carlson: The coronavirus pandemic is a global fraud perpetrated by China, abetted by the powerful

More than a year into the pandemic, we still don’t know its full story

Tucker Carlson By Tucker Carlson | Fox News

Tucker: COVID-19 a ‘global fraud’ by China that cost American lives
‘Tucker Carlson Tonight’ host accuses mainstream media of concealing the truth about the origins of pandemic

You’ve heard a lot recently about “voter fraud” and “election fraud.” But now comes more profound news, of a global fraud that began long before Election Day and has ruined millions of lives, killed hundreds of thousands, and deeply affected the outcome of our presidential election.

We speak, of course, of the coronavirus pandemic. Simply put, we’ve been lied to.

The latest evidence comes from samples collected during Red Cross blood drives last year and analyzed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in a study published on Monday.

Researchers tested 39 blood samples from California, Washington and Oregon that were collected between Dec. 13 and Dec. 16, 2019. At the time, no one in the United States had heard of COVID-19. The Chinese government didn’t even acknowledge its existence until Dec. 31. And yet, every one of those samples came back positive for coronavirus antibodies. Keep in mind that antibodies don’t develop for at least a week after exposure to the virus.

That means the human coronavirus was being transmitted throughout the American population far earlier, possibly months earlier, than we were told. We don’t know yet how it happened, but we know for certain that it did.

The CDC has found dozens more positive samples from blood tests taken beginning at the end of December, and they found them in many other parts of the country — in Michigan, Iowa, and Massachusetts.

Analysis of tests in other countries has shown even earlier spread. Scientists now know the coronavirus spread to Italy as early as last September and to South America two months later, in November.

So clearly, what we have been told for almost a year about the origins of the coronavirus is not true. Why are we just learning this now, a month after a presidential election? We’ve had reliable antibody tests since the summer, yet no one thought to test Red Cross blood samples until now? Why weren’t elected officials demanding a coherent account of where this virus that has changed American history forever came from, how it got to the United States and how it spread through our population? Why don’t we know that yet?

Because nobody seemed to care. Our elected officials were too busy enjoying their newfound power. They were shutting down small businesses and arresting people for kayaking without masks.

Back in January, 11 months ago, the Department of Homeland Security warned that American airports could be ground zero for a new pandemic, but Congress yawned. On Jan. 24, a day when, these blood samples now prove, the virus had already spread across the continent, the Trump administration held a classified briefing on the coronavirus for the entire U.S. Senate, but only 14 senators showed up for it. Why? Well, Jan. 24 was the final day of House Democrats’ opening statements in the Senate impeachment trial of President Trump.

So the people in charge of protecting the country were not worried about coronavirus, but were standing in front of their mirrors rehearsing the moment when they could finally confront Alan Dershowitz about the dreaded Zelensky phone call.

Now they’re claiming the pandemic caught them completely by surprise. How do they get away with that? They get away with it because our public health establishment gives them cover and has all year. Two days before that classified Senate briefing that only 14 senators showed up for, Dr. Anthony Fauci went on Fox Business Network’s “Bulls & Bears” to reassure Americans they could trust the Chinese government.

FAUCI: From what I can see right now, they really are being much, much more transparent than what happened with SARS, where they really kept back information for a while. It was embarrassing to them. They’re really transparent now. They put the sequence of the virus up on the public database right away. So in that respect, they’ve been transparent.

In a well-functioning country, a line like that would ensure that you never work in public policy again. China has in fact been transparently dishonest about the virus. Beijing officials are now claiming the virus came to their country from somewhere else, that it arrived in frozen food, possibly as a bioweapon staged by the U.S. military. They’re not saying this in secret. They’re saying it on social media. But so far, Twitter hasn’t bothered to fact-check that claim. Like Fauci, Silicon Valley trusts China far more than they trust you.

Ron Klain, Joe Biden’s pick for White House chief of staff, told Axios on Jan. 27 that China has been “more transparent and more candid than it has been during past outbreaks.” Why did Ron Klain think that? Possibly because the World Health Organization told him to think so.

On Jan. 8, the WHO — funded, of course, by the Chinese government — released a similar message: “Preliminary identification of a novel virus in a short period of time is a notable achievement and demonstrates China’s increased capacity to manage new outbreaks.”

In other words, the rest of us ought to be thanking the government of China for the blessing of COVID-19. A week later, WHO was back with more demonstrably untrue propaganda straight from their overlords in Beijing.

That was yet another dangerous lie that unquestionably cost American lives, but Twitter didn’t fact-check that either. Instead, the American media dutifully amplified the message. They told us anyone who suggested this thoroughly Chinese virus came from China was, by definition, a racist. So thorough was the news blackout on the Chinese origins of this virus that you had to go to Australian television to find out what was actually happening.

A few weeks ago, “Tucker Carlson Tonight” interviewed a Chinese virologist, Dr. Li-Meng Yan, who fled her country with this message for us: This virus came from a government lab in China. She said she knew that in her own country she would have been punished, possibly killed, for saying so. So she came here, to the land of the free. What did she find? She found her words censored by American tech companies working in tandem with the tyrants she fled.

Internal documents now prove that Chinese officials knew they were facing a coronavirus pandemic — something they’d never seen before — but they hid that information from the world and they arrested those who tried to report it. More critically, millions of people continued to travel through the city of Wuhan in central China, the epicenter of the pandemic. Then more than a million Chinese citizens flew to the United States. It wasn’t until Jan. 20 that Chinese President Xi Jinping finally admitted the virus could be contagious. At best, that’s criminal negligence. At worst, it’s something like mass murder.

But no, said the WHO. In fact, it was just more evidence that the Chinese Communist Party was doing an extraordinary job managing the pandemic.

DR. BRUCE AYLWARD, WHO SENIOR ADVISER TO THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL, MARCH 25: Right now, there’s very, very few countries that have actually been able to reverse this epidemic and bring their cases down to [a] very low level. And in fact, the only country that has done that is China. It was the passion, the diligence, the sense of responsibility, the seriousness of the average Chinese — and I want to use that term very carefully because they weren’t average. They were extraordinary people, but they were driven by a sense of collective responsibility.

Got that? The Chinese are driven by “a sense of collective responsibility.” Contrast that with us fat, lazy Trump-voting Americans. We demand to go to church on Sundays or go out to dinner with our families once in a while and then deservedly, we get sick and die. Not Xi Jinping and the obedient communist nation he leads. They found a better way.

That’s the message from the media, our health establishment, and our elected officials, and it has been for almost a year. But it’s not the whole story. We know that now. We’re still not even close to knowing what really happened. We should find out.

Blood tests reveal that the Coronavirus COVID-19 originated before September 2019 and China knew and hid its origins

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Democratic elites are promoting a class system based on race and gender and sexual orientation

Tucker Carlson: The ‘diversity’ delusion and the destruction of the American meritocracy

Imagining a truly diverse corporate America

Tucker: Elites using identity politics to preserve class system

‘Tucker Carlson Tonight’ host accuses liberals of pushing Biden to use gender, race to pick Cabinet

Imagine for a moment that you were an incompetent public official, and you didn’t want anyone to know you were incompetent. What would you do?

Well, your first task would be to destroy the meritocracy, the system that rewards people in this country for their effort and their talents as opposed to rewarding them for irrelevant criteria like how they look. A meritocracy is the main threat to incompetent people. It keeps them from getting rich and powerful, so they hate it.

So what does tearing down a meritocracy look like in practice? It looks a lot like Joe Biden staffing a presidential administration. A recent piece in Politico reports that the Congressional Black Caucus is demanding that Biden select a Black secretary of defense. Not a secretary of defense who is good at defending America, mind you, a secretary of defense with the correct skin color.

Now, feminist groups are mad about this, says Politico — not because it would leave the country vulnerable, but because they want a female secretary of defense. According to these groups, the secretary of defense should look like them because it’s all about them, not about the Pentagon or the country or the military threats we might face in the future. It is about identity, which is to say it’s about narcissism. “When I see people in power, I must see myself.” That’s the demand, and not just at the Pentagon.

Here’s how Vox.com covered the race to replace Steve Mnuchin at the Treasury Department: “Lael Brainard, who is white [sic], is seen on Wall Street and by her skeptics on the left as the most likely Treasury secretary … Raphael Bostic, who would be the first Black and first openly gay Treasury secretary, is also receiving some consideration.”

Vox went on to note that some, “Hispanic Democrats” are upset that there are “no Hispanic candidates legitimately in the mix for the other three top jobs” in a Biden administration.

Hispanic, Black, gay — those are categories. They’re not people. They’re not individuals. This is about identity, not country. It’s about Balkanization, not unity. “Straight White men are the enemy,” says the party led by one, and so it goes. It’s hard to imagine anything uglier than this. This doesn’t go anywhere that you’d want to go. It ends with discord and worse, but it continues.

Here’s the Huffington Post’s account of the struggle to fill Kamala Harris’ Senate seat in the state of California: “Three main camps and their subgroups are trying to influence [Gov. Gavin] Newsom: Those advocating for a Black woman; those advocating for a Latino; and those advocating for a member of the LGBT community.”

In other words, certain jobs for certain identities. Certain skin colors have pre-prescribed roles. How is this different from a traditional caste system? How is this better than the Jim Crow South? Those are fair questions, but no one ever asks them. Instead, the media just applaud.

You’ll notice at this point that no one ever explains what exactly diversity is, not with any precision. Yet diversity is now required by corporate America, or at least their definition of diversity is. The NASDAQ, for example, has proposed new listing rules that require companies to “have or explain why they do not have at least two diverse directors, including one who self-identifies as female and one who self-identifies as either an underrepresented minority or LGBTQ+.”

Not to be outdone, the bank Credit Suisse announced it has created an index of 350 “LGBTQ-inclusive companies,” and they will, of course, be rewarded accordingly.

Think this through for a minute. There’s a lot of money at stake here with these definitions, and a lot of power that attaches. At some point we’re going to need highly specific ways to verify that the people who are benefiting from these categories deserve to, that they are indeed women (whatever that now means) or that they are legitimately LGBTQ+. What does all that verification look like? Blood tests? Home monitoring? We’ll find out at some point, unfortunately.

Janet Yellen doesn’t seem worried about that. Yellen is Joe Biden’s pick for Treasury secretary, and she’s mindlessly on board with all of this. She’s rich enough to be. Here’s Yellen explaining that eliminating hard-to-define social disparities is a central goal of federal economic policy going forward:

YELLEN: We risk missing the obligation to address deeper structural problems –inequality; stagnant wages; racial disparities in pay, job opportunities, housing, food security, and small business lending to deny wealth-building to communities of color; gender disparities to keep women out of the workforce and keep our economy from running at full force. It’s a convergence of tragedies.

The idea, if you weren’t clear, is this: Everybody pays money into the federal Treasury, but only some people benefit, depending upon who Janet Yellen thinks should benefit.

But step back a few feet. Everything Yellen said is the opposite of the actual truth. If you’re actually in favor of diversity, real diversity, you’ll notice that the diversity measures they’re proposing won’t make anything more diverse.

These proposals are merely a way for the people in charge to hire more of their friends. What you’re seeing is an attempt to preserve and codify the class system that is already in place and is growing more rigid by the day. If you really want to flatten America’s social structure, you would demand a return to meritocracy. You’d want a system where anyone, no matter where they were born or what they look like or who they slept with, could succeed. That’s what we used to have, but it’s the opposite of what the left is now demanding.

If you really wanted to make companies more diverse, you would try to actually diversify them. You would hire people who were not in any sense like you, people with actually different backgrounds. You could hire more people with technical degrees, for example, and fewer who studied marketing or communications. You’d find people who lived in rural zip codes. You’d seek out employees who were deeply involved in their churches or owned guns, or who had close family members who died of opioid overdoses.

More than anything, on day one, you would put a cap on the number of employees who went to elite colleges. Let’s just start with the top 100 on the U.S. News & World Report annual list. You would put an outright ban on hiring Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford graduates. They’ve got enough representation to last for the next half-century. You’d make any previous employment at McKinsey & Company or any other absurd consulting firm instantly disqualifying.

You would look beyond race and sex to the cultural markers that actually matter and that actually determine later success in a class system. You would subtract points from any applicant who’d ever spent the night on Nantucket or Martha’s Vineyard or St. Barts, and you would add points to applicants who vacation in Branson or Lake Mead or the Florida Panhandle. You would start an aggressive affirmative action program for fat people, for deer hunters, for anyone who drives an American car or eats dinner while wearing a hat. Are those people represented on corporate boards? I don’t think so. Find a fat person in corporate America. There’s not one.

Our leaders are doing precisely the opposite of any of that, and it tells you everything. What you’re seeing is the ruling class pulling up the ladder as they always do, as all ruling classes do. How many of the people lecturing you about diversity come from exactly the same elite background? Pretty much all of them, so what they’re advocating for is people just like themselves.

We can give you 1,000 examples, but we’ll just pick one. Marcus Mabry runs global digital programing at CNN and has been around journalism forever. He’s now one of CNN’s most energetic diversity enforcers, but here’s the interesting part: Mabry himself went to high school at The Lawrenceville School in New Jersey. He got two degrees from Stanford. Then he spent decades at Newsweek, The New York Times and Twitter. So naturally, he claims to be highly concerned about inclusion. Here he is in 2016 lecturing his then-employer about it:

MABRY: There is a lot of work to do at Twitter and throughout tech, and that’s one of the reasons I came to Twitter, which is, I think it’s so important that we’re at the table. It was true of The New York Times, too. But we have to make more of us. We have to create more of us and not just African-American, but also Latino and Hispanics who are very much also underrepresented in technology and at Twitter … I’m convinced our current leadership is committed to improving that diversity, but there’s a lot of work to do.

Marcus Mabry, who is on the board of one of the most expensive boarding schools in the world, is fighting the man. Of course he is. It’s working for him and all his friends. It’s just not working for you, and it’s not intended to. You are excluded from their inclusion. But you knew that.

Democratic elites are promoting a class system based on race and gender and sexual orientation

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

With Joe Biden we get fascism: the collusion of government and corporatism

Tucker Carlson: A Biden victory would usher in the Age of Oligarchy | Fox News

If Joe Biden wins, the tech companies, the big banks, Beijing and the billionaire class will have won as well

Editor’s Note: This article is adapted from Tucker Carlson’s opening commentary on the Nov. 6, 2020 edition of “Tucker Carlson Tonight”

Tucker Carlson:  Who exactly is Joe Biden, the man who may be our president come Jan. 20? The truth is, as of right now, we don’t really know.  We have no clue what Joe Biden actually thinks, or even if he’s capable of thinking. He hasn’t told us and no one’s made him tell us for a full year.

n fact, it’s becoming clear there is no Joe Biden. The man you may remember from the 1980s is gone.  What remains is a projection of sorts, a hologram designed to mimic the behavior of a nonthreatening political candidate: “Relax, Joe Biden’s here. He smiles a lot. Everything’s fine.” That’s the message from the vapor candidate.

So who’s running the projector here? Well, the first thing you should know is that the people behind Joe Biden aren’t liberals. We’ve often incorrectly called them that. A liberal believes in the right of all Americans to speak freely, to make a living, to worship their God, to defend their own families, and to do all of that regardless of what political party they belong to or what race they happen to be born into or how far from midtown Manhattan they currently live.

A liberal believes in universal principles, fairly applied. And the funny thing is, all of that describes most of the 70 million people who just voted for Donald Trump this week. Most of them don’t want to hurt or control anyone. They have no interest in silencing the opposition on Facebook or anywhere else. They just want to live their lives in the country they were born in, and it doesn’t seem like a lot to ask. So by any traditional definition, they are liberal.

However, our language has become so politicized and so distorted that you would never know it. What you do know for certain is that the people behind Joe Biden are not like that at all. They don’t believe in dissent. “You think one thing? I think another. That’s OK.” No, that’s not them at all.

They demand obedience to diversity, which is to say, legitimate differences between people is the last thing they want. These people seek absolute sameness, total uniformity. You’re happy with your corner coffee shop? They want to make you drink Starbucks every day from now until forever, no matter how it tastes. That’s the future.

Now, if these seem like corporate values to you, then you’re catching on to what’s happening. The Joe Biden for President campaign is a purely corporate enterprise. It’s the first one in American history to come this close to the presidency. If a multinational corporation decided to create a presidential candidate, he would be a former credit card shill from Wilmington, Del., and that’s exactly what they got. What’s good for Google is good for the Biden campaign and vice versa.

We have never seen a more soulless project. They literally picked Kamala Harris as Biden’s running mate, someone who can’t even pronounce her own name. Not that it matters, because it’s purely an advertising gimmick.

We watched all of this come together in real time. We stood slack-jawed in total disbelief as a man with no discernible constituency of any kind rose to the very top of our political system, as if by magic. It’s possible in the end that Joe Biden himself never convinced a single voter of anything over the entire duration of the presidential campaign, but he didn’t have to. Joe Biden won the Democratic nomination because he wasn’t Bernie Sanders. He came to where he is today because he isn’t Donald Trump. It’s the shortest political story ever written.

Now, whatever you may think of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, they did it the traditional way.  Each one of them had the support of actual voters. Living, breathing people loved them, believed in them, vested their hope in them, and, by the way, agreed with their ideas, which they articulated clearly. But corporate America hated them both. They couldn’t be controlled, particularly Donald Trump, whose complete unwillingness to submit made him the greatest possible threat. That’s why they hate Donald Trump, because he won’t obey.

It’s insulting to say that Joseph R. Biden won this election, if that is what comes to pass. The tech companies will have won. The big banks will have won. The government of China, the media establishment, the permanent bureaucracy, the billionaire class — they will have won, and not in the way that democracy promises. If a single person equaled a single vote, a coalition like that could never win anything. There aren’t enough of them.

But as a group, they have something that Donald Trump’s voters sadly do not have, and that is power. They have lots of power and they plan to wield that power, whether you like it or not. It’s all starting to look a lot like oligarchy at this point. The people who believe they should have been in charge all along now may actually be in charge.

So what does that mean for the rest of us? Will corporate America declare victory and back
off? Can we speak freely again? Will they take the boot from our necks? Can we have America back now that the Great Orange Emergency has passed? Well, the mandatory lying orders finally be lifted?

Those are the questions we’ll be paying attention to, since we plan to stay in this country. And one other thing while we’re at it, who’s excited to greet our new corporate overlords? Who plans to collaborate, particularly of those on the right side, the Republican side, the side that said it was defending you? Who’s happy about all of this? That seems worth keeping track of, just so we know who we’re dealing with here.

Ned Ryan is the CEO of American Majority. He does keep track, and he joins us tonight. Ned, it’s great to see you.

Ned Ryan: Good to see you, Tucker.

Tucker Carlson: It goes without saying, not any kind of call, we don’t know where this is going; votes are being counted; there are apparent irregularities; those will be examined, we pray; in some cases, they’ll be litigated. But a lot of people in Washington feel that this is over, and some of them seem pretty happy about it. Who are they?

Ned Ryan: Well, first of all I want to highlight, you’re right, and I think your opening monologue was it’s incumbent upon Trump to not stop to use every option at his disposal.

Tucker Carlson: Right.

Ned Ryan: If nothing else for the implications of it: the American people deserve a free and fair election that they can trust, and trust an institution instead of half the people think it’s been stolen.

But think about it. You’re right. This ruling class of administrative state, big tech, corporations: all of these people think that they can get rid of Trump and we’ll go back to normal. We’ll create a normal. We’ll go back. They’re delusional.

I mean, the point I want to make here tonight is that Trump has red pilled literally 70 million American people. He’s illuminated everything, whether it’s the danger of China, whether it’s the danger of big tech, the administrative state, fake news, a whole litany of issues. They’re delusional if they think that these people, myself included, are somehow just going to disappear if they can somehow take out Trump.

And they’re wedded to a broken system. That’s the other thing, Tucker. They’re wedded to a broken system that has sold out the American people. And now they want to go, and you know, they’re going to try and snap back to advancing policies that are actually going to sell out the American people and the middle class especially. They’re not going to fix immigration; they’re not going to fix trade deals; they’re not going to break up big tech; they’re not going to do any of these things. and yet this is only going to accelerate whatever comes next. Again, America first is not going away.

Tucker Carlson: So I was particularly interested, and there’s a lot of this but I just want to highlight one to begin. In the comments of Lindsey Graham, who just won reelection in the state of South Carolina because conservatives voted for him, the people around Trump put a great deal of pressure on Lindsey Graham to send the money. So after a day or two he made a great show of sending a 500 grand.

But then on the issues that matter, Lindsey Graham immediately ran away from the ideas he claimed to support and said he will be happy to sell out his voters with an amnesty deal, like within hours of the election.

Ned Ryan: But this is the surrender caucus. It feels like they’ve been waiting in the wings. They can’t wait to get back into where they actually control the Republican party. And I’m talking not only about Lindsey Graham, Ben Sasse, Mitt Romney, heck, even Liz Cheney. These neocon globalists, who can’t get enough of the vulture capitalism and the selling out of the American middle class. They can’t wait to get back into power.

And the shameful part of it is you know that they have not embraced Trump for a variety of reasons because he’s a repudiation of everything that they have stood for. And he has been in control of the party and now they’re waiting in hopes that he somehow will be removed from it. And these are the kind of people, Tucker, who quite frankly have been surrendering, have been going along to getting along, don’t know how to win.

And quite frankly a lot of their policies, as we have seen, they’ve been more concerned about rebuilding the middle east than the midwest. That is a shameful part of the Republican party, and they are doing nothing for the most part right now to stand up and say we’re not going to let this happen what is taking place with this election because they fail to understand if we don’t fix what has taken place?—and I am convinced that major fraud has taken place?—it is the end of free and fair elections. Republicans won’t win again. They will be in a permanent minority if we are not careful, especially if we are not careful about these Georgia senate races. And we have no backstop if we lose the majority in the senate.

Tucker Carlson: Well, that is exactly right, and, of course, that’s the tragedy. You have a deeply flawed party that refuses to protect its own voters and represent their legitimate interests. But they are the only hope that this country doesn’t descend into something totally unrecognizable.

Ned Ryan: Kind of scary.

Tucker Carlson: So it puts 70 million decent people in a tough spot. Ned Ryan, we’ll talk to you again I appreciate it.

Tucker Carlson: Thanks, Tucker.

Tucker Carlson: So there is a political realignment coming. The distance between what people want and what they’re getting from their leaders is just too vast. Some Democrats understand this and they’re very nervous about it. We’ve got the tape next.

With Joe Biden we get fascism: the collusion of government and corporatism

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The mainstream media and the Democratic Party and the intelligence agencies and the tech monopolies are your enemies. Like fascists they are misleading you with propaganda so that you will obey.


Tucker Carlson: Hunter Biden scandal shows media collusion with powerful is the real threat to America
When journalists strike secret alliances with the very people they’re supposed to be holding accountable, we are in deep trouble.

Editor’s Note: This article is adapted from Tucker Carlson’s opening commentary on the Oct. 30,2020 edition of “Tucker Carlson Tonight.”

OPINION By Tucker Carlson | Fox News 10/31/2020

Tucker Carlson: Media collusion is the real threat to democracy 

‘Tucker Carlson Tonight’ host accuses the mainstream media of collaborating with the Democratic Party to take down Trump

For five years, we have watched the news media treat Donald Trump in a way that no American president has ever been treated. Richard Nixon himself — disgraced and forced to resign his office in the end — got a pass by comparison.

Reporters hate Trump with an all-consuming mania. They hate him so intensely that at times it’s been amusing to watch. If Donald Trump announced a cure for cancer at one of his rallies, CNN would denounce him for fixing drug prices.

If you’re a fair minded person, all this has been infuriating. Not only is it dishonest, it’s also patronizing because it’s almost unbelievably stupid.

“Trump spied for Russia! Trump works for Putin! Trump’s a racist because he likes borders and doesn’t want to live in Haiti!”

Clearly, all the smart kids went into finance. America’s websites and TV stations got the rest.Unfortunately, we’ve got to live with the consequences of that.

But as grating as all of this is, unremitting hostility to the president of the United States is far from the greatest threat America faces. Reporters are supposed to be tough on people with power. That’s why we have journalism, to keep a close eye on those who have outsized influence over our lives.

The people we should watch carefully include business moguls, the intelligence agencies, prominent academics, cultural figures, military leaders, and most obviously, our politicians. The rest of us can’t really know what the people in charge are doing at all times. A reporter’s job is to find out and tell us.

So in the end, the real threat to America isn’t too many nasty questions from reporters. It’s the opposite of that. The real threat is collusion. When journalists strike secret alliances with the very people they’re supposed to be holding accountable, we are in deep trouble. Lies go unchallenged.  Democracy cannot function. And that’s what we’re watching right now.

Thursday, we learned that the FBI is conducting an active investigation into Joe Biden’s son for business deals that apparently included his father, the former vice president. That is not speculation. It is confirmed. Former Biden business partner Tony Bobulinski sat for a five-hour interview with six FBI agents last week. They asked him about his business dealings in China with the Biden family.

Now, we don’t know if this investigation will result in indictments, but we know that it could. That’s significant because Joe Biden, as you may have heard, is running for president. The election is on Tuesday.  So by any possible measure, this is a blockbuster, stop-the-presses news story. It’s not some naughty picture from somebody’s laptop. This is a criminal investigation into business deals that we know for a fact Joe Biden was party, too.

So why haven’t you heard more about this? If you don’t watch Fox News, you’ve likely heard nothing at all. Not a word. Do you know why? Because the media are collaborating with the Democratic Party. They’re collaborating with the intelligence agencies that spy on Americans with impunity. They’re collaborating with the tech monopolies that have choked off the average person’s access to legitimate information.

We’re not overstating any of this. We wish we were. The people you’re supposed to be able to trust are dismissing a completely legitimate, verified news story.

These people wouldn’t know “Russian disinformation” if it got into the shower with them. They know nothing. Russia didn’t forge these emails on Hunter Biden’s laptop. Vladimir Putin didn’t invent the two separate meetings that Tony Bobulinski had with Joe Biden to discuss business in China, the business the FBI is now investigating in an active criminal investigation. That’s all entirely real. It happened. It is happening now. And the media know that it did. Yet they’re telling you it’s all fake, a concoction of a hostile foreign power.

So you have to ask yourself: At some point, why would they tell you what they know is not true? Because these people are not your allies. They’re not trying to help you or inform you. Just the opposite.

These people are your enemies. They are misleading you so that you will obey, and maybe it’ll work. Maybe they will get Joe Biden elected president next week without asking the most basic questions or vetting him in any way. That’s the gambit.

But what then? Many of these people will then go to work for Biden officially. We’d expect that because without Donald Trump to hyperventilate over, the business models at many news outlets will collapse and these people will need jobs. But Joe Biden and Kamala Harris can’t hire everyone at NBC. Some of these people have to continue to be “journalists.”

The question is, can they really do that? Can they keep playing pretend live on your screen every night after everything we have just witnessed.

The mainstream media and the Democratic Party and the intelligence agencies and the tech monopolies are your enemies. Like fascists they are misleading you with propaganda so that you will obey.

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment