What is it with CrowdStrike?

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

CrowdStrike, The DNC's Security Firm, Was Under Contract ...

CrowdStrike was working on behalf of the DNC, the company was also under contract with the FBI for unspecified technical services. According to a US federal government spending database, CrowdStrike’s “period of performance” on behalf of the FBI was between July 2015 and July 2016. CrowdStrike’s findings regarding the DNC server breach — which continue to this day to be cited as authoritative by everyone from former FBI Director James Comey, to NBC anchor Megyn Kelly — were issued in June 2016, when the contract was still active.

Some may believe this is all old news. It may be years old, however, it remains unsolved. With a new Biden administration, it is important that many, many of those old players are now part of the Biden presidential operation, especially Susan Rice and the others that did unmasking. Beware of what comes.

Meanwhile… when governments collude… especially intelligence agencies and operatives…

Real Clear Politics published in May of 2020 the following:

CrowdStrike, the cyber-security firm that first accused Russia of hacking Democratic Party emails and served as a critical source for U.S. intelligence officials in the years-long Trump-Russia probe, privately acknowledged more than two years ago that it had no evidence that Russian hackers stole emails from the Democratic National Committee’s server.

CrowdStrike President Shawn Henry’s admission under oath, in a recently declassified December 2017 interview before the House Intelligence Committee, raises new questions about whether Special Counsel Robert Mueller, intelligence officials and Democrats misled the public. The allegation that Russia stole Democratic Party emails from Hillary Clinton, John Podesta and others and then passed them to WikiLeaks helped trigger the FBI’s probe into now debunked claims of a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia to steal the 2016 election. The CrowdStrike admissions were released just two months after the Justice Department retreated from its its other central claim that Russia meddled in the 2016 election when it dropped charges against Russian troll farms it said had been trying to get Trump elected.

And the Crowdstrike CEO is proud of the work his company does with the FBI. Going back further, it is noted: Attorney Andrew Bagley has been employed by the cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike since January 2015; this company was involved deeply in the Democratic National Committee (DNC) hacking debacle. In 2010, Bagley served as a visiting researcher at the Link Campus University in Rome; while there, his résumé notes that Bagley, “Conducted research and held discussions with Italian and American prosecutors, special agents, and intelligence officials about intelligence analysis, national security, cybersecurity, and counterterrorism policy.”


According to Bagley’s online résumé, he served as the E-Discovery Technical Advisor to the FBI, conducting legal research, advising on technical issues, and drafting policy for the Discovery Coordination and Policy Unit within the FBI, from 2012 to 2015.

In its capacity as attorney for the DNC, Perkins Coie – through another of its partners, Michael Sussman – is also the law firm that retained CrowdStrike, the cyber security outfit, upon learning in April 2016 that the DNC’s servers had been hacked.

Interesting: Despite the patent importance of the physical server system to the FBI and Intelligence-Community investigation of Russian meddling in the 2016 election, the Bureau never examined the DNC servers. Evidently, the DNC declined to cooperate to that degree, and the Obama Justice Department decided not to issue a subpoena to demand that the servers be turned over (just like the Obama Justice Department decided not to issue subpoenas to demand the surrender of critical physical evidence in the Clinton e-mails investigation).

Instead, the conclusion that Russia is responsible for the invasion of the DNC servers rests on the forensic analysis conducted by CrowdStrike. Rather than do its own investigation, the FBI relied on a contractor retained by the DNC’s lawyers.

Link International - Link Campus University of Rome

Link University, Rome

As Senator Lindsey Graham published the now declassified documents/testimonies on RussiaGate, CrowdStrike comes into view again. Why? Well, the FBI has a long and comprehensive history with the Link Campus in Rome and now we learn more about Joseph Mifsud. He was on staff at the Link Campus in Italy. Remember how AG Barr flew to Italy for some one on one interviews? Those he interviewed remain unknown. Could AG Barr have met with Vincenzo Scotti or maybe even Mifsud himself? As for Link Campus University, Italy: Mifsud, Scotti, and Frattini were all employed by this Italian university. ‘Enzo’ Scotti is Scotti is an Italian politician and member of Christian Democracy. He was Minister of the Interior and Minister of Foreign Affairs. And it could be that Mifsud is hiding in Russia….just a suggestion.

As intelligence expert Chris Blackburn notes on Twitter, leafing through the minutes, “the FBI knew that Joseph Mifsud was working with Italian intelligence figures-trainers at the Link Campus in Rome. Because the FBI worked there, too. Of course, Mueller didn’t want to include it in his report.” Nothing but “Russian agent”, then. As RealClearInvestigations points out, after Mifsud was identified as the man who would talk to Papadopoulos, Mueller’s team described him as someone with important Russian contacts. This description of the Maltese lecturer, however, ignored Mifsud’s own ties to Western governments, politicians, and institutions, including the CIA, FBI, and British intelligence services. It’s really curious that, despite Mifsud’s central role in the investigation, the FBI conducted only a brief interview with him in an atrium of a Washington, D.C., hotel in February 2017. Mueller’s team later claimed that Mifsud provided false statements to FBI agents but did not charge him as happened with Papadopoulos. How could he be a Russian agent? And if he did, why wasn’t he questioned?

Then there is CrowdStrike and Ukraine, or is there?

FILE – CrowdStrike co-founder and CTO Dmitri Alperovitch speaks during the Reuters Media and Technology Summit in New York, June 11, 2012.

After CrowdStrike released its Ukraine report, company co-founder Dmitri Alperovitch claimed it provided added evidence of Russian election interference. In both hacks, he said, the company found malware used by “Fancy Bear,” a group with ties to Russian intelligence agencies.

CrowdStrike’s claims of heavy Ukrainian artillery losses were widely circulated in U.S. media.

On Thursday, CrowdStrike walked back key parts of its Ukraine report.

The company removed language that said Ukraine’s artillery lost 80 percent of the Soviet-era D-30 howitzers, which used aiming software that purportedly was hacked. Instead, the revised report cites figures of 15 to 20 percent losses in combat operations, attributing the figures to IISS.

The original CrowdStrike report was dated Dec. 22, 2016, and the updated report was dated March 23, 2017.

The company also removed language saying Ukraine’s howitzers suffered “the highest percentage of loss of any … artillery pieces in Ukraine’s arsenal.”

Just a few months ago, in fact, in June of 2020, CrowdStrike on their website apparently felt compelled to put forth the following detail for reasons that may be coming clear.
June 5, 2020 UPDATE

Blog update following the release of the testimony by Shawn Henry, CSO, and President of CrowdStrike Services, before the House Intelligence Committee that was recently declassified.

What was CrowdStrike’s role in investigating the hack of the DNC?

CrowdStrike was contacted on April 30, 2016, to respond to a suspected breach. We began our work with the DNC on May 1, 2016, collecting intelligence and analyzing the breach. After conducting this analysis and identifying the adversaries on the network, on June 10, 2016, we initiated a coordinated remediation event to ensure the intruders were removed and could not regain access. That remediation process lasted approximately 2-3 days and was completed on June 13, 2016.

Why did the DNC contact CrowdStrike?

The DNC contacted CrowdStrike to respond to a suspected cyber attack impacting its network. The DNC was first alerted to the hack by the FBI in September 2015. According to testimony by DNC IT contractor Yared Tamene Wolde-Yohannes, the FBI attributed the breach to the Russian Government in September 2015 (page 7).

Why did the DNC hire CrowdStrike instead of just working with the FBI to investigate the hack?

The FBI doesn’t perform incident response or network remediation services when organizations need to get back to business after a breach.

CrowdStrike is a leader in protecting customers around the world from cyber threats. It is common for organizations to hire third-party industry experts, like CrowdStrike, to investigate and remediate cyber-attacks when they suspect a breach even if they are collaborating with law enforcement. As John Carlin, former Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division at The Department of Justice testified before the House Intelligence Committee (cited from page 21 of his testimony):

“A lot of — outside of any political organization, companies, most corporations, they often would use these third party contractors, who they hired through their own counsel, and maximize the control from the point of view of the victim.”

What the heck is going on here for real? Outside of this little website of mine, is anyone else going deeper and seeking truths when it comes to CrowdStrike, Perkins Coie, Link University, and the FBI… much less the all things DNC?

Other key citations for reference include:





Chinese Communist Party is “Inside the Gates”

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

In part from Breitbart:

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo warned lawmakers that the threat from the Chinese Communist Party is “inside the gates” during a meeting with House Republican lawmakers on Friday.

Pompeo told members of the conservative Republican Study Committee that as a former lawmaker, he is aware of the threat posed by China but that he did not appreciate “the scope and the scale and the nature” of how close the threat is until he became Central Intelligence Agency director.

This CCP infection inside the United States goes beyond Senator Feinstein, Congressman Eric Swalwell, former California Senator, Barbara Boxer or even closing the Chinese embassy in Houston. There is the Thousand Talents Program that has wormed its way through academia and the Confucius Institutes.

How about a little known Florida congresswoman, Stephanie Murphy (D-FL)? She is quite dedicated to China due in part to her husband Sean and his manufacturing company, 3N2. His company produces sports equipment/apparel in China. Further, she advocates for all the democrat policy points including open-border policies and more studies into “gun-violence”. Crazy enough, Murphy actually joined a small group of Democrats in calling to remove tariffs on the Chinese government.

None of this is actually new when it comes to Stephanie Murphy, in fact, it goes back as far as 2017. Did anyone notice?

When you are on social media, do you actually work hard to determine if you are being trolled by some foreign entity? We are quite aware of Russian disinformation but going back years, at least to 2016 (interesting year), China’s own troll farm has been just as successful in the social media sphere and you are likely a victim. DC politicians are just as likely to be willing accomplices.

There is or was a Chinese operation called the 50-centers and you probably clicked on a lot of their social media posts.

The Left-leaning policy organization Foreign Policy published the following in 2016.

A May 17 paper written by professors at Harvard, Stanford, and the University of California, San Diego provides the most detailed and ambitious description of China’s 50-centers available to date. It confirms the existence of a “massive secret operation” in China pumping out an estimated 488 million fabricated social media posts per year, part of an effort to “regularly distract the public and change the subject” from any policy-related issues that threaten to anger citizens enough to turn them out onto the streets. But the research finds no evidence these 50-centers are, in fact, paid 50 cents, nor does it find they engage in direct and angry argument with their opponents. Instead, they are mostly bureaucrats already on the public payroll, responding to government directives at a time of heightened tension to flood social media with pro-government cheerleading.

Opinion: How Chinese paid cyber-troll farms are upending ...

Understanding the behavior of pro-government netizens is important, given the stakes. In the past two and a half years, the Chinese government has used a combination of muscle and guile to cow online opinion leaders into submission, muzzling social media as a political force, and leaching public dialogue of much of its independence. But beneath the peppy, pablum-filled surface that has resulted, Chinese social media remains a contested space. In countless online chat rooms, bulletin boards, and Weibo threads, Chinese social media roils with the same ideological debates that also increasingly consume Chinese academics and elites.

Broadly speaking, the clash pits so-called leftists — that is, conservatives and neo-Confucianists who marry stout Chinese nationalism, a yearning for reconstructed socialism, and the quest for a reversion to hierarchy and filial piety — against rightists, or reformists, who continue to espouse what a Westerner would recognize as universal values, such as civil and human rights, government transparency, and democracy and constitutionalism. It’s more common for the two camps to exchange barbs than ideas. The leftists label the rightists sellouts, turncoats, and “public intellectuals,” the latter delivered with an implicit sneer. The rightists often call the leftists “50-centers,” regardless of who really pays their bills.

What is worse is a separate issue known as the Chinese cyber-attacks. A for instance, however:

More than two dozen universities in the United States and around the world were targeted as part of an effort by the People’s Liberation Army, the Chinese military, to build up its naval and submarine forces.

iDefense, one security firm, tracked the Chinese cyberattacks to a hacking group known variously as Temp. Periscope, Leviathan, or Mudcarp. A second firm, FireEye, calls the hacking group APT40 or Temp. Periscope.

FireEye said the operations appear linked to Chinese activities in the South China Sea, where Beijing has built disputed islands and deployed advanced missiles on them beginning a year ago. The Chinese military hacker unit in charge of that region is the Chengdu-based Unit 78020.

The 27 universities included the University of Hawaii, the University of Washington, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Take caution, judge slowly. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is right.


Trevor Loudon Videos – 01/18/21

By: Trevor Loudon | New Zeal

True Agenda of Communism: How society is being taken over by hidden forces | Counterpunch

Black Lives Matter is Actually Part of the Maoist Playbook Against America

Dyed in Red: The sinister background of “Moderate” Kamala Harris, China’s American dream president

New Virginia Majority: How China-backed American communists manipulated minority groups to vote blue | Counterpunch With Trevor Loudon

How the CCP mobilized its US networks to take down the US | Counterpunch With Trevor Loudon

Russia’s Hidden Puppet in America: What is the Council of a Livable World and who does it sponsor? | Counterpunch With Trevor Loudon

8M Phone Calls And 1M Doors Knocked, Minorities Targeted; Leader Vows To Make America Ungovernable | Counterpunch With Trevor Loudon


The Consolidation of the One-Party Dictatorship

By: Cliff Kincaid

With the centralization of the means of communication in the hands of the state, the consolidation of a one-party dictatorship in the United States is well underway. We have to quickly dispense with the notion that Facebook, Google, Twitter, Amazon, and Apple are “private” entities that can do what they want. They represent the power of the state and their conduct is therefore in violation of the First Amendment.

Big Tech companies, said conservative attorney Mark Fitzgibbons on an edition of America’s Survival TV, have assumed the role of “state actors.” This means they are doing the bidding of Congressional Democrats such as Senator Mark Warner of Virginia. Led by Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, left-wing politicians have, in effect, pressured Big Tech into “helping the government regulate political speech.”

In the Wall Street Journal article, “Save the Constitution from Big Tech,” Vivek Ramaswamy and Jed Rubenfeld argue that, “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.”

Ramaswamy says, “We’ve gone from a 3-branch government to one with a branch office in Silicon Valley. The right answer is to open channels of dialogue, not close them.” But massive censorship is now underway, violating the First Amendment rights of the American people.

The practice is also known as “government censorship by proxy,” in the words of the officer of a competitor, Parler, which went off-line because of actions by other Big tech companies.

But all of this begs the question: state actors on whose behalf?

On one level, liberal politicians threaten and pressure these companies to restrict “hate speech.” That’s the typical charge leveled by groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center against conservatives.

On another level, the Russia-gate allegations, the kind openly made by Senator Warner, were part of the political campaign to undermine the Trump presidency. The CIA and FBI were behind their circulation to get Trump and used media outlets for their own purposes. For example, Amazon, a company with extensive links to the CIA, is owned by Jeff Bezos, who also owns the Washington Post, a mouthpiece for the agency.

Amazon played a key role in forcing Parler off the Internet.

Under the watchful eye of the Deep State, it was an easy step to go from supposedly targeting the Russians for disinformation to actual censorship of Trump and his supporters. In this way, Big Tech companies became actors on behalf of the Deep State.

Remember that former intelligence officers, dominated by those associated with the CIA, issued a letter insisting that revelations in the New York Post from a Hunter Biden laptop about foreign payments to the Biden family were somehow associated with the Russian government.  This was a lie. Joe Biden cited this letter as he was running for president in an effort to dismiss the charges against his family.

In an example of how these Big Tech companies function as state actors, Facebook and Twitter restricted the distribution of the article, with Twitter claiming its ban on posting “hacked materials” was the justification for the censorship. That was a phony charge as well. Indeed, charges that the material from the laptop was hacked appear to have been CIA disinformation designed to help Biden deflect public interest away from his own foreign connections, including to China.

But the pro-China slant is not just evident in what former CIA people say and do. Trump’s Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe has now confirmed that intelligence about China’s 2020 election interference was suppressed by current top CIA officials.

Hence, the Deep State has covered up the extent of Red China’s support for the candidate Trump called “China Joe Biden.” No wonder the American people are angry.

More relevant than ever before, America’s Survival, Inc. has released a hard-to-find copy of the 1961 House Committee on Un-American Activities analysis of the book, How Parliament can Play a Revolutionary Part in Transition to Socialism. This is a how-to-book on how communists overthrow non-communist majorities and make democracies into dictatorships.  The book outlines how a parliament or legislative body (such as the U.S. Congress) can be helpful in “transforming democratic nations” into communist countries.

Pressure on Big Tech by Democrats in Congress is one means toward this end. Big Tech suppresses stories, such as the Biden family’s ties to China, and follows up allegations of a stolen election by suppressing the voices of dissent to this unfolding catastrophe for our nation.

America is becoming a one-party socialist state, with the Republicans relegated to permanent minority status. Those looking for the Supreme Court to stop this rush into totalitarianism are going to be disappointed.

The House Committee on Un-American Activities report examines the case of the communist takeover of Guatemala, citing an analysis of where the judiciary “made one valiant attempt to protect its integrity and independence, but the communists, using their control of the legislative body, caused the Supreme Court to be absolved when it refused to give approval to a Communist contrived law.”

The national legislature “legally removed” the Supreme Court, “the only remaining restraint on the national legislature’s actions.”

Eventually, of course, an armed revolt “was required to end their [communist] rule in 1954.”

A similar thing is in the process here, with the proposals for expanding the Court to a sufficient number to outmaneuver any possible combination of “conservative” justices. Democratic Senator Ed Markey says “we must abolish the filibuster and expand the Supreme Court.”

In looking at how this could happen, the Washington Post said last October 8: “Let’s say Democrats are in a position to seriously consider this: They win the presidency, keep control of the House of Representatives and win the majority in the Senate, thus controlling the White House and all of Congress…what if Democrats start passing Biden’s agenda, and inevitable challenges by Republicans make their way to a conservative Supreme Court, which stops some of the legislation?”

The Post, sympathetic to these schemes, said Biden would need majority votes in the House of Representatives and in the Senate to approve expanding the court, just like any other piece of legislation, “though Senate Republicans could try to filibuster it.” That’s when they vote to abolish the filibuster.

If the American people revolted against the stealing of a presidential election, they will not tolerate the thieves and their allies consolidating their power by silencing voices of opposition.


#BigTech #BigCorporations Decides Who is Not Welcomed

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

By now we all know the fact that Amazon Web Services canceled Parler and Parler remains dark until the judge decides on the case. We are also learning that other tech companies are canceling people en masse for violations of terms of service which is selectively applied. Not only are large corporations like Citibank, Blue Cross, Marriott, and JP Morgan in the cancel mix but there are others including well-known universities like Harvard. How about American Express, Dow, AT&T, Comcast, Disney, 3M, Bank of America, GoDaddy, Hilton, Microsoft, Target, UPS, Tyson, and Ford? This is because few Republicans think independently and ask hard questions. Frankly, this is called dissent and oddly enough, even those jurists on the Supreme Court write dissenting opinions. Yeesh.

This is another dimension to cyberwar.

Big Tech Censorship: Part 1 | Full Measure

Exactly what dissent is not welcomed in the public square? As the cancel-culture manifests, there is no end just yet.

So, now we add Mail Chimp and Loews Hotels to the mix.  Loews Hotels just canceled Senator Hawley’s (R-MO) fundraising event in Orlando. As for Mail Chimp, they canceled Virginia Citizens Defense League and changed their terms of service.

Mailchimp, a US-based marketing automation service, has updated its Terms of Use regarding types of content that are prohibited for distribution on the platform. In particular, the service now “does not allow the distribution of content that is, in our sole discretion, materially false, inaccurate, or misleading, in a way that could deceive or confuse others about important events, topics, or circumstances.”

You have to wonder what BigTech is really fact-checking and just what some members of Congress really know for fact. The election scandal is not so much about Dominion as it really could be about SmartMatic. So, let’s examine a few things, shall we?

SmartMatic has U.S. patents.


In 2013, there was an interesting lawsuit. In part:

There are two sets of defendants. The first set includes: Dominion Voting Systems International Corporation, a Barbados corporation; Dominion Voting Systems, Inc., a Delaware corporation; and Dominion Voting Systems Corporation, a Canadian corporation(collectively, ―Dominion‖or ―Defendants‖). The remaining defendant, Iron Mountain Intellectual Property Management, Inc., a Delaware corporation, did not brief the motion before me. In their Answer, Verified Counterclaim, and Third-Party Complaint, Defendants asserted claims against a third-party defendant, Smartmatic TIM Corporation, a Philippines corporation.B.Facts In October 2009, Dominion granted Smartmatic a worldwide (except for the United States and Canada) nonexclusive license to certain precinct count optical scan(―PCOS‖) voting systems that Dominion had developed (the ―License Agreement‖or the ―Agreement‖). The License Agreement granted Smartmatic rights to certain patents and patent applications that Dominion owned or controlled (the ―Licensed Patent Rights‖) and to ―all know-how, trade secrets, methodologies, and other technical information owned or possessed by Dominion‖ (the ―Licensed Technology‖).1The License Agreement contains a non-competition provision.

As for the Venezuelan connection, per the SmartMatic website published in 2018: (After Maduro remained in power)

Smartmatic announces cease of operations in Venezuela

United Kingdom, London – March 6, 2018 – After 15 years of service and 14 elections assisted in providing a secure and auditable voting system, Smartmatic closed its offices and ceased operations in Venezuela.

The reasons for the closure are widely known. In August of 2017, after the elections to the National Constituency Assembly, Smartmatic publicly stated that the National Elections Council had announced results that were different from those reflected by the voting system. This episode leads to an immediate rupture of the client-provider relationship.

Smartmatic did not participate in the last two elections (Regional Elections of October 15, 2017, and Municipal Elections of December 10, 2017), a fact that was timely informed. Since the company was not involved in these processes and given the fact that the company’s products are not under warranty and were not certified for those elections, Smartmatic cannot guarantee the integrity of the system, nor can it attest to the accuracy of the results.

Smartmatic is currently operating in some 40 countries around the world, partnering with governments, election commissions, and citizens seeking to conduct secure, clean, and transparent elections.

Stands to reason that not only should American citizens question known facts but find the unknown facts and the same holds true for members of Congress on both sides of the aisle. So digging deeper, doing an examination of the Congressional record is worthy of time. If those in the Senate are questioning elections and they have more intelligence reports than we outside the Beltway do, perhaps #BigTech should judge slowly and do their own work as well as #BigCorporations before all this canceling continues. But read on.

On the Senate side, as recently as October 19, 2020, 7 Senators challenged the election results in Venezuela, 3 were Republicans, and 4 were Democrats. Note this was after the Maduro stolen election. There was a Senate Resolution #749. In part:

Whereas the regime of Nicolas Maduro is undertaking efforts to hold fraudulent legislative elections for Venezuela’s National Assembly in December 2020 that will not comply with international standards for free, fair, and transparent electoral processes;

Whereas the Maduro regime is seeking to use fraudulent legislative elections to undermine Venezuela’s sitting democratically elected National Assembly;

Whereas, as codified under section 112 of the VERDAD Act of 2019 (22 U.S.C. 9702), it is the policy of the United States to recognize the democratically elected National Assembly of Venezuela, elected in December 2015 and sworn in on January 2016, as the only legitimate national legislative body in Venezuela;

Whereas the United States Government and members of the international community have rightly denounced the Maduro regime’s efforts to hold fraudulent legislative elections in December 2020;

Whereas, on October 13, 2020, members of the Lima Group–including Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, and Venezuela–issued a joint declaration on the Maduro regime’s efforts to hold legislative elections in December 2020 that expressed “firm rejection of the continuing of the illegitimate regime of Nicolas Maduro in holding parliamentary elections without the minimum democratic guarantees and without the participation of all political forces”;

Whereas, on September 17, 2020, the International Contact Group on Venezuela–whose members include Argentina, Costa Rica, Ecuador, the European Union, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Panama, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and Uruguay–issued a joint declaration on the Maduro regime’s efforts to hold legislative elections in December 2020 that stated that “conditions are not met, at the moment, for a transparent, inclusive, free and fair electoral process”;

We report, you decide… thousands of moving parts here.


Trump’s Silenced Majority – The Voiceless, Voteless, And Canceled Governed No Longer Consent

By: Daniel John Sobieski

The violent storming of the Capitol cannot be condoned but it must be explained as so many posturing Trump critics and haters are unwilling to do. Just what do you expect will happen when 75 million Americans are told their votes don’t matter and can be stolen without consequence or concern, that their voices don’t matter and can be silenced at will and that now they must be punished for supporting the candidate of their choice in a former free republic?

As I write this, Parler, the touted alternative to the Big Tech monopoly and oligarchy, has been knocked off the Internet by the politically connected Big Tech tyrants Amazon, Google, Facebook, and Twitter. Competition is the answer, they told us. They lied to us. Big Tech would and has squelched every competitor just as they have silenced, censored, and fact-checked, the voices of millions banned from speaking on social media, as is their president, banned from connecting and communicating with their peers. Orwell’s “1984” was supposed to be a warning but for the likes of Jack Dorsey, who has repeatedly lied to Congress, and Mark Zuckerberg, who sees himself as the arbiter of truth, endangering our lives by censoring the China virus debate and threatening our freedoms by supporting censorship and lockdowns, it has become an instruction guide.  One by one they are knocking us off social media, those who won’t submit to the increasingly mandated group think. They preach unity. They seek subservience.

Donald Trump was first elected because he heard and listened to and became the voice of the forgotten American. The Washington swamp, which he pledged to drain and which is now reaching flood stage, was not amused and rose up to destroy him and all who dared to support him. His supporters were mocked as deplorable and irredeemable, bitter clingers clinging to their dangerous and bigoted religion, rubes in flyover country who were supposed to just shut up pay their taxes, and stream propaganda on Netflix. Many who now allegedly cherish a peaceful transfer of power sat silently or were complicit as the outgoing Obama administration spied on the incoming Trump administration and conspired to overturn it through phony charges of Russian collusion using a fake dossier paid for by his political opponents, the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton. They sat silent or were complicit in a phony impeachment over a Ukraine phone call even as the Ukraine corruption of the Bidens was ignored. Within hours of Trump’s 2016 election, the Washington Compost was headlining that his impeachment had already begun. Peaceful transition? “Peaceful protestors” rioted during his inauguration, in one famous incident setting a limo ablaze that was owned by an immigrant small businessman. Now they want to impeach Trump again so he can’t run again in 2024 this time for inciting a riot he did not incite.

As blogger Robert Stacy McCain observes:

Twitter banned President Trump last night, “due to the risk of further incitement of violence.” Note the word “further,” an implied assertion that on some previous occasion, Trump incited violence….

Ann Althouse — who, I remind you, is a professor of law at the University of Wisconsin — took the time to read the transcript of Trump’s hour-long speech Wednesday and found no such incitement. It simply never happened, no matter how often the media say it happened….

The evident assumption by the anti-Trump media is that anything Trump says is bad and wrong and that anytime something bad happens, Trump is to blame. But there were some 200,000 people in D.C. for the “Stop the Steal” rally, and only a small percentage of that crowd — perhaps 2,000 people — were involved in breaching the Capitol. If everybody heard the president’s “incitement,” why didn’t everyone storm the Capitol?

Jordan Davidson at Da Fed has compiled a short, helpful list of 10 Times Democrats Urged Violence Against Trump And His Supporters.

The “mostly peaceful” protests in Washington, D.C., as liberals described the year-long Antifa and BLM riots they cheered on in Portland, Seattle, Minneapolis, and other Democratic run cities, gave some the excuse to storm the Capitol with tragic results. Like the Big Lie spread about President Donald J. Trump after Charlottesville that he said white supremacists were “fine people” another lie has sprung forth that he incited some of the 75 million Americans who were disenfranchised by a stolen election to riot. He did neither such thing.

Democrats and their wholly-owned media chant that by reciting allegedly false claims about election fraud, Trump incited his crowd to storm the capitol. Legal scholar and former Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, who defended Trump during his first impeachment, says there is a big and constitutionally protected difference between advocacy and incitement to riot and that Trump did no such thing. He would defend Trump again, said Dershowitz:

“It would be my honor if asked to defend the constitution once again against unconstitutional attempts to weaponize impeachment for partisan purposes,” Dershowitz said.

Dershowitz said that what Trump said during the rally that preceded the storming of the Capitol was protected by the First Amendment and is, therefore, not an impeachable offense.

“Everything he said was fully protected by the First Amendment and cannot be deemed an impeachable offense,” he said. “To impeach him for a protected speech would violate both the First Amendment and the impeachment clause.”

This is what Trump really said, after reciting a list of documented unconstitutional election law changes, vote tampering, manipulation, and fraud, as reported by the Palm Beach Post:

“And after this, we’re going to walk down there, and I’ll be there with you, we’re going to walk down … to the Capitol and we are going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women,” Trump told the crowd. “And we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them. Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong.”…

“We will never give up. We will never concede. It doesn’t happen. You don’t concede when there’s theft involved,” Trump said. “Our country has had enough. We’re not going to take it anymore.”…

He further said: “You’re the real people. You’re the people that built this nation. You’re not the people that tore down this nation.”

The president did also say: “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”

And he added in a bit of irony: “Now it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy.”

“Peacefully and patriotically” were not words you heard when progressives formed their “resistance” against Trump or as our cities burned in Antifa and BLM led riots. The George Floyd/BLM protests cost 1-2 billion dollars in damage. They protested in over 140 Cities. Dozens of people died and over 14,000 were arrested, a federal courthouse in Portland was burned, as well as a historic church in Washington, D.C. but only the Capitol Hill protestors threatened our democracy. Really?.

And the leftist mobs and their leaders wanted more, as PJMedia pointed out:

Do you still need more proof that Democrats have been advocates of political violence for some time?

In August of last year, Squad member Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), said there should be “unrest in the streets” over President Trump and the GOP  for turning a “deaf ear” to Americans’ concerns.

“This is as much about public outcry, organizing and mobilizing and applying pressure so that this GOP-led Senate and these governors that continue to carry water for this administration, putting American people in harm’s way, turning a deaf ear to the needs of our families and our communities – hold them accountable,” she said.

“Make the phone calls, send the emails, show up,” she continued. “You know, there needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there’s unrest in our lives.”

This election was stolen, even though the media will deny the evidence of electronic tampering, ignore the testimony by people sworn under oath before Congress and legislative committees, ignore the signed affidavits of witnesses to widespread and systemic fraud, ignore the complicity of RINO Republicans like Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, and statistical anomalies that boggle the mind and are mathematically impossible unless engineered by human hands.

Consider what the 75 million Americans who voted for Trump, and the rest of us for that matter, have been through. for the last four years. From day one of the Trump administration, the mainstream media ignored any pro-Trump news and later any anti-Biden news. They trumpeted phony Russian collusion stories and phony Ukraine meddling charges, ignoring Joe Biden’s very real quid pro quo threat to save son Hunter Biden from a Ukrainian investigation.

Social media and Big Tech giants like Google, Twitter (whose Jack Dorsey is a worse threat to our democracy than Hitler or Vladimir Putin), and Facebook shadowbanned and “fact-checked” us to death, deleting our posts, hiding our posts, and even deleting our accounts altogether.

In the age before cable, there was an iconic sci-fi program called The Outer Limits whose opening featured a series of test patterns, flickering screens, and a narrator who solemnly intoned, “Do not attempt to adjust your television set. We will control all that you see and hear.” Today that is a chilling reality as social media giants like Twitter routinely censor what people can see and hear on their sites.

Twitter and the other social media giants need to know that George Orwell’s “1984” was a warning, not a technical manual.  Its insidious form of censorship goes beyond what even Big Brother could have dreamt of. It constituted an in-kind political contribution to the Democrats and the Biden campaign. Meanwhile, Joe Biden hid in his basement, knowing the fix was in.

Media and big tech controlled what we saw and heard. Now they want to control everything we say and who we can say it to. They ban President Trump from social media. They hide the Hunter Biden dotty. They shut down the social media account of the New York Post. They control who we can talk to, what we can say, and even to a certain extent what we are allowed to think and believe.

The vendetta, the purge, and the retribution have begun. People are being fired for wearing MAGA hats, for having been at a Trump rally, or for expressing support on social media. Liberals in and out of Congress have called for denying Trump supporters seats in Congress, business contracts, or jobs in government and the private sector. There have been calls for compiling lists of Trump supporters to isolate them, reeducate them and punish them.

These are the 200,000 people who peacefully assembled in Washington D.C. to hear the president. These are the 75 million voters who voted for Trump and now condemn their disenfranchisement. Perhaps we should call then the silenced majority. Now voiceless and voteless, they have seen their constitutional rights stripped from them under the guise of fighting a virus that escaped from a China lab and was allowed by China to spread worldwide. They have lost their freedom of religion, their freedom of speech, their freedom of assembly, and forget freedom of the press. They are the new huddled masses, yearning to breathe free.

They are now the resistance to tyranny.

*Daniel John Sobieski is a former editorial writer for Investor’s Business Daily and freelance writer whose pieces have appeared in Human Events, Reason Magazine, and the Chicago Sun-Times among other publications.


KeyWiki Weekly Profile – Kooper Caraway


Kooper Caraway

Kooper Caraway is president of the Sioux Falls AFL CIO. He lives in Sioux FallsSouth Dakota.

Caraway began organizing in high school. When immigration agents, under the direction of the Bush administration, set up camp and began raiding homes in Mt. Pleasant, Texas Kooper Caraway, then a high school junior, organized a series of actions and demonstrations against the federal agents. He then went to work in Dallas for the Labor Movement.

While working for North Texas Jobs with Justice Caraway became close with Texas Communist Party organizer Gene Lantz.

Gene Lantz and Kooper Caraway

He has remained close to the Communist Party USA ever since.

Caraway participated in a Town Hall Forum on the unemployment crisis on Sunday, August 16, 2019, with Bill Fletcher, Jr., of the pro-China communist group Liberation Road, along with Brad CrowderJoe Henry and Judith LeBlanc, all from the also pro-China Communist Party USA.

In 2017, Kooper Caraway spent his 28th birthday in communist Cuba.

Since moving to South Dakota in 2017 to serve as the lead organizer for AFSCME Council 65, Caraway has been active in local politics.

He has served as an executive board member of the South Dakota Democratic Party.

Tatewin Means with Kooper Caraway

In 2018, Caraway endorsed and supported Tatewin Means, daughter of the late Russell Means of the pro-communist American Indian Movement in her run for South Dakota Attorney General.

(See more|Kooper Caraway…)


Wasted Lives

By: Tabitha Korol

The Muslim Brotherhood produced The Project, a document that contains its plan for radical Islam to infiltrate and dominate the west. Among their aspirations is to make “Palestinians” a cause célèbre, and to instigate a constant campaign of inciting hatred against Jews, by any means. As a member of BDS (Boycott Divestment, Sanctions) and SJP (Students for Justice in Palestine), Susan Abulhawa, a jihada, advocates the economic and civilizational destruction of Israel. The inexact and skewed information in her book, Mornings in Jenin, is Da’wa, a strategy of silent jihad, designed to delegitimize Israel and invite Muslims to accept Islam as a peaceful religion.


Following their Prophet, Muslims may never accept the world’s transformation after the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire and the birth of Israel. To delegitimize Israel, they must maintain that Palestine and Palestinians have always existed, yet there is no documentation of any governance, language, customs, currency, artifacts, or date and cause of its demise. These are Bedouin Arabs descended from nomads of the Arabian Peninsula and Syrian Desert living in Judea and Samaria, who yielded to the armies’ directions and were then abandoned, leaving their abused, traumatized children to wage jihad – Holy War. Abulhawa’s book follows the lives of four generations of the fictional terrorist family of Yehya Mohammad Abulheja.

In each generation, the Abulheja family is bound to wage jihad and establish their god’s authority on the earth. “The Holy War (Islamic Jihad) in Islamic Jurisprudence is basically an offensive war. . . the duty of Muslims in every age . . .” This story’s oldest generation, Grandfather Yehya traces his ties to the land since 1189, AD, its founding attributed to a general of Saladin’s. Had he gone further back, he’d have discovered the Jewish Kingdom that lasted for thousands of years, beginning with the reign of King Saul, 11th c. BCE. Had he gone forward, he’d have had to contend with the Saladin dynasty’s conquest by the Mamluks.

In 1953, Yehya dons his newly whitened clothes and his Bedouin kafiyyah. As an aside, I recognize this as the same attire worn by U.S. Army Major Hasan on his murderous rampage at Fort Hood on November 5, 2009. Despite his son’s plea to stay, Yehya leaves Jenin refugee camp for Ein Hod, returning with olives and fruit from property he owned years before. On his second foray, he is killed by residents of the artists’ colony, hailed as a martyr as his body is returned to his home by the Red Crescent. The author is deceptive with half-truths. Yehye did not have his clothes whitened for harvest. His first trip would have been an investigative mission. Though not disclosed, we can be certain that he was armed for his second venture, dressed for holy war, and prepared to die as a shahada, a martyr.

The next generation is his two sons. Darweesh is the first to meet beautiful Dalia, the 14-year-old Gypsy Bedouin, but her father prohibits the clandestine relationship and, to enforce his point, puts a hot iron to the palm of her hand, warning her not to scream or cry. She pulls her pain inward. In Islamic reality, her hand would have been chopped off or her father would have murdered her for his honor. Dr. Tawfik Hamid explains the severe suppression of conscience and desensitization to or acceptance of violence without remorse, as displayed by Dalia’s father.

Before long, Yehya’s other son, Hasan, announces he will marry Dalia. His mother blames the Zionists for his not accepting the family’s choice of bride and for the world’s turmoil.

Hasan’s best friend is Ari Perlstein who, with his parents, fled Germany in 1937, after his leg was permanently injured by a Brownshirt. Ten years later, the author predictably uses Ari’s Jewish voice to announce that the Jews are heavily armed and on the attack. Factually, Britain embargoed weapons for Jewish forces and surrendered strategic locations and arms to the Arab Liberation Army for Palestine.

Thousands of Jews arrived on the shores of what was then called Palestine. Having survived torture, starvation and disease, the loss of loved ones and belongings, the war-damaged Holocaust refugees wanted only to return to their G-d-ordained <c:\users\tybee\desktop\jewishvoice.org\read\article\where-did-it-all-start-origins-arab-israeli-conflict>sliver of land, two-tenths of one percent of the Islamic landmass. Ill-equipped to fight five armies with the remnants of WW II munitions, they suffered huge losses.</c:\users\tybee\desktop\jewishvoice.org\read\article\where-did-it-all-start-origins-arab-israeli-conflict>

War is upheaval. Those who reached Israel had to again fight for their survival. By the 1948 War’s end, 400,000+ Arabs flee the area and 450,000 Jews fled Arab lands. Abulhawa’s information is deficient.

The Jews accepted and the Arabs rejected recommendations of the special UN General Assembly in November 1947. When the British withdrew, the Arabs attacked the new state of Israel on May 14, 1948. Abdul Rahman Azzam Pasha announced, “This will be a war of extermination and momentous massacre,” and Israel launched a (retaliatory) massive artillery and aerial bombardment of villages, which Abulhawa, in her fiction, mischaracterizes. More than 400,000 Arabs heeded their leaders and evacuated, expecting to return victoriously. The <c:\users\tybee\desktop\1947 un=”” resolution=””>1947 UN resolution would have meant two states, no refugees, and full and equal citizenship in Israel. Cairo called for Holy War.</c:\users\tybee\desktop\1947>

In her novel, as the Israelis enter Ein Hod, Arab families flee on foot and with carts. Hasan carries five-year-old Yousef while Dalia follows, carrying baby Ismail, when he is swiftly ripped from her arms. She screams her deepest agony, but he is lost to them forever. The author conjures up an Israeli soldier, Moshe, who “believes himself on a mission from G-d” and “envious” of the Arab women’s many children. He impulsively snatches Ismail and flees home to his wife Jolanta, who’d been made barren by Nazi cruelty. She embraces the child and names him David. The author, in a moment of “creative genius,” calls the baby’s discerning feature, a scar on his cheek from a protruding crib nail, “the scar of David.”

The logicality of a soldier carrying a baby while dutifully looting the village with his unit is more than ludicrous; it is a case of projection. It was Mohammed’s warriors who kidnapped for slavery, conversion, and booty. Realistically, Moshe and Jolanta would have welcomed one of the many parentless children who were brought to Israel.

Considering her father’s brutality, her shock by an explosion and minor leg injury, and the kidnapping of her six-month-old son, Dalia begins displaying symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder. She rallies with the birth of her daughter, Amal, in 1955, but gradually sinks into dementia, as her husband and first-born Yousef join the wars. Dalia eventually becomes unraveled, needing Amal’s constant care, and dies before Amal turns 14.

Returning to real facts, in 1966, Soviet Intelligence incorrectly reported Israel’s imminent campaign against Syria, heightening tensions and causing fledgling Palestinian guerilla groups to increase in Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan, and Israel retaliated in the Jordanian West Bank in November. On May 14, 1967, Abdel Nasser mobilized Egyptian forces in the Sinai, requested that UNEF (UN Emergency Forces) leave, and, joined by Jordan and Iraq, blockaded the Gulf of Aqaba to Israeli shipping. To the endless overt threats, Israel launched a preemptive assault against Egyptian and Syrian air forces on June 5 and captured the Sinai Peninsula, Golan Heights, Gaza Strip, and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem.

In the fictional account, Hasan mobilizes to defend against Zionist aggression, and that contrary to reason and truth, Israel singlehandedly attacks Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Iraq. After removing his cache of 20 weapons from beneath the kitchen floorboards, Hasan and Yousef leave the twelve-year-old Amal and her friend Huda behind, hidden under the floor, with only each other for comfort through the terrifying sounds of war. It is this act that haunts Yousef for the rest of his life, the guilt that he was unable to stay and comfort them as they trembled until the bombing abated. Abulhawa fails to perceive that these children are steeped in dread, their lives consumed with war and death.

-Part Two-

1967: Despite being outnumbered, Israel regained Judea and Samaria. In the story, when Yousef returns briefly, he tells Amal that he has seen a scarred Israeli soldier, undoubtedly their lost brother Ismail, called David. David hears his own friend remark about their likeness, and Moshe is burdened with his secret, admitting it to David only on his deathbed, begging forgiveness. He is haunted by Dalia’s cries, the awful evictions, killings, and rapes.

The rape accusation is projection, customarily a Muslim action against their enemy’s women. Islam teaches and justifies violence against women. Quran 2:223, “Women are your fields, go, then unto your fields when and how you please.” Quran 8:60: “Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power . . . to strike terror (into the hearts of) the enemies of God.” Islamic rape is steeped in hatred and vengeance. Jihadis are trained to dehumanize and inflict great physical harm on women, one method being Taharrush. Islamic apartheid also fosters rape of boys by older men “of status,” an age-old, self-perpetuating Islamic practice of humiliation and emasculation.

Strangely, in 2017, an anti-Israel activist declared that Israelis are racist because they don’t rape Palestinian women! Notwithstanding military purpose, Israelis pursue a high moral culture, attested by Colonel Richard Kemp. All capable Israeli youths are required to serve in the armed forces, re-enter society to become devoted spouses and parents and contribute to their country’s growth.

Abulhawa has her creation, Amal, riding through Jerusalem and witnessing the destruction of ancient houses, but omits clarifying that this is not senseless injustice, but Israel’s way of punishing residents responsible for deadly terrorist attacks.

It is 1982, and the author brings her family to the next accusation, that Israel provoked the PLO to strike. The historical facts are that Israel had been harassed, shelled, attacked, and raided by PLO guerrillas in Lebanon, a major component of the Lebanese Civil War, which triggered Syria’s intervention and limited occupation. Israel provoked the PLO actions that would justify their full-scale invasion of Lebanon, in order to bomb the PLO targets in Beirut and southern Lebanon, headquarters for 14,000 armed fighters.

In August, the Christian Phalangist militia, the PLO’s bitter enemies, massacred as many as 3,500 Palestinians, Lebanese, Pakistanis, Iranians, Syrians, and Algerians in Sabra and Shatila, 400,000 made homeless, infrastructure devastated. Women and children were evacuated to Lebanon, the PLO exiled to Tunisia. Had there been no raid, the Palestinians would have continued their homicidal jihad unimpeded. The author appears to be lacking in understanding.

Amal, now living in Philadelphia, receives a call from her brother, Yousef, screaming vengeance for the massacre in both refugee camps. He screams that his wife and daughter have been killed, as was Amal’s husband, Majid. Amal gives birth to Sara, and suffers from depression, remaining a traumatized, emotionally distant mother, as Dalia had been.

Amal is next contacted by her long-lost brother Ismail, now called David, who has come to America to meet his sister for the first time, and the author has a field day inventing unfound slurs against Israel. David is convinced that “Israel is a lie,” and that “Palestinians paid the price for the Jewish Holocaust,” the author’s vicious trope. No. Palestinians are paying the “price” for Mohammed’s desire for world triumph and the Palestinian all-or-nothing conquest strategy, with a strong faction that is unable to live in peace. The women suffer desperately for their inferior position in Islamic societies. Amal and David promise to meet again soon.

Amal and 19-year-old Sara visit “Palestine” and are met by David and his son, Jacob. They visit Dr. Ari Perlstein who suggests that Hasan was killed in the 1967 war and that Yousef bombed the US embassy in 1983. Amal sees the “Judaizing of Jerusalem,” never alluding to Jerusalem’s (Yerushalayim in Hebrew) being one of the oldest cities in the world, est. 4th millennium BCE), and the religious and administrative center of the Kingdom of Judah in 10th C BCE.

The four continue their drive to Jenin, population 45,000, an infamous den of terror, and visit Huda, whose husband and mute son, Mansour, were taken by Israelis for terrorist activities. Suicide bombings and attacks had been increasing in intensity, followed by two Israeli incursions, arrests, demolitions, and curfews. They hear the destruction of nearby homes and buildings, proving the Israeli policy of bulldozing homes of terrorists, when an Israeli soldier enters this terrorist home, aims his weapon at Sara and Amal runs to take the bullet. Amal is killed.

Israel had endured approximately 16 bombings, many of them suicide attacks. Following the Battle of Jenin, in 2002, however, there were cries worldwide of massacre and genocide, when Israel conducted two waves of incursions with ground troops, helicopters, tanks, and fighter jets. Of the camps’ 15,000 residents, 25 terrorists, 26 civilians, and 25 IDF soldiers were killed, far fewer than the thousands killed in Kosovo by Muslims or from the suicide bombing at an Israeli hotel (28 killed, 140 injured) by Palestinians. The IDF was ambushed with explosive devices in the Jenin homes and on the roads, and women helped to lure the soldiers into traps.

The next generation will live in Philadelphia. Sara and Jacob return to her mother’s home in Philadelphia, and Mansour, Huda’s only surviving son, will join them while also studying art. Yousef to remain unidentified and kill no more. Still, this author’s inaccuracies or misinformation, accusations, and slander, are stealth jihad, intended to encourage violent jihad. The ambition of a depraved warlord of the 5th century continues to waste the lives of Muslims and their victims in the 21st century.

After visiting Israel, John LeCarre wisely said, “No nation on earth was more deserving of peace — or more condemned to fight for it.”


Who Knew About and Planned the “Insurrection?”

By: Cliff Kincaid

The violence on January 6 was planned ahead of time, and we should not be surprised to learn that the same intelligence agencies that have been trying to bring down the Trump presidency knew about this in advance and were planning to blame it on the president. Evidence has already surfaced — from a liberal media source — regarding FBI knowledge in advance of what happened on Capitol Hill on January 6.

Remember that Democratic Party Senator Chuck Schumer had said, in response to Trump’s criticism of those agencies, “Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you.”

Rushing to judgment on the events of January 6, the ACLU endorsed Trump’s impeachment.

Yet, at the time of Schumer’s comments about the CIA and other agencies getting back at Trump, an ACLU official by the name of Jay Stanley commented, “…if it’s really the case that dissing the intelligence community might result in retaliation by that community against a politician, then the lines of power in our political system have become dangerously distorted.”

That has certainly been proven by the events of the last four years.

He went on to say, “It’s not clear what the ‘six ways from Sunday’ are that Schumer has in mind. Presumably, they could range from antagonistic leaks to concrete actions overseas to undermine a president’s foreign policy, to darker forms of sabotage and blackmail.” He explained that “our spy agencies are professionals at manipulating and interfering with governments — though all such activities are clearly illegal if applied within the United States or to U.S. persons.”

Strangely, in regard to the events of January 6, the Washington Post, a mouthpiece for the CIA, has reported, “A day before rioters stormed Congress, an FBI office in Virginia issued an explicit warning that extremists were preparing to travel to Washington to commit violence and ‘war,’ according to an internal document reviewed by The Washington Post that contradicts a senior official’s declaration the bureau had no intelligence indicating anyone at last week’s demonstrations in support of President Trump planned to do harm.”

This report has all the earmarks of a CIA leak to the paper-based on intelligence information the agency received and passed on to the FBI. It looks like the CIA is trying to fix the blame for failing to prevent the violence on the FBI.

Investigative journalist John Solomon also offers evidence of a planned attack. Hence, it was not a spontaneous riot emanating from Trump’s speech. Such a charge, still popular in the dishonest mainstream media,  was bogus in the first place since Trump had called on his supporters to march to the Capitol peacefully and patriotically.

Even while catching the FBI in a lie about the agency’s knowledge in advance of a planned attack on the Capitol, the Washington Post phrase “in support of President Trump” is misleading, since Trump had no control over the various groups, including Antifa and drug abusers, who showed up.

Cases are too numerous to mention, but one stands out – an arrested protester who was a notorious drug dealer specializing in LSD and marijuana.

We have recorded an interview with an eyewitness on evidence that marijuana smokers, typically on the “progressive” side of the political spectrum, were in force in the demonstration on January 6.

Letting those events proceed without hindrance — and then blaming the violence on Trump — has to now be seen as part of a plan to force Trump to leave office in disgrace rather than allow him to continue the fight for election integrity.

It could be one of the “six ways from Sunday” cited by Schumer.

In addition to foreknowledge of the plot, federal agents may have been conducting agitation and propaganda activities.

“Over the past several weeks,” declared Gab CEO Andrew Torba, “I have been openly warning the Gab community to be on the lookout for fedposters [federal agents posting provocative messages] and threats or encouragement of violence on Gab. This PSYOP campaign started back in early December with newly created accounts popping up out of nowhere and making threats of violence. We have zero-tolerance for this behavior and it is absolutely not free speech.”

Gab is an alternative to Twitter, run by Jack Dorsey, which has censored Trump.

Torba referred to psychological operations modeled after something called “the CIA Mockingbird Media complex” and recorded a video about this, noting how the New York Times provided the initial report blaming Gab for various threats that are then repeated ad nauseam.

Mockingbird, the name of a bird that mimics other bird sounds, is also the name of a CIA project that targets journalists, either through surveillance or their use as intelligence assets, or both.

In practical terms, what we see is that media outlets, seemingly in unison, echo the claim that conservatives, Christians, and other such people are behind any violence which then occurs.

On a deeper level, the plan may be to provoke violence in order to justify a crackdown that gives more power to intelligence and law enforcement agencies to go after Trump supporters.

In a statement, Gab noted the double standard: “Over the course of 2020, political violence across the United States has been normalized by Democratic Party politicians and the mainstream media who excused away and refused to enforce the law against ‘peaceful protestors’ — in reality violent agitators and domestic terrorists — who embarked upon various outrages including the occupation of several square blocks of Seattle, the setting fire to small businesses and federal buildings across the U.S., and yes, even forcing D.C. to board up on more than one occasion.”

Referring to the events of January 6, the statement said, “What happened today is not as unprecedented as the political class would have us believe. This is not the first mob that has attacked a government building in the United States this year — courthouses and police stations all over the United States have been attacked by anti-police activists year-round. Only six months ago, Nancy Pelosi decried law enforcement’s work to stop a dangerous mob from burning down a federal building in Portland as ‘political games’ and ‘abuses of power.’”

All Americans should be demanding that Congress, especially those who voted to impeach Trump on bogus charges of “incitement,” expose the roles of the CIA and FBI in the “insurrection.”

  • Cliff Kincaid is president of America’s Survival, Inc. usasurvival.org (Note: my email service has been suspended for political reasons so please go to my home page for updates until I can arrange an alternative way to communicate with our subscribers and supporters).