Watch: FL Sheriff Uses 2 Photos to Show Difference Between a Peaceful Protest and a Riot

Riots and peaceful protests — there’s a clear difference between the two, right? The question is simple enough, but some on the left still can’t seem to make the distinction. (Consider the establishment media’s riot coverage, for instance.) Polk County, Florida, Sheriff Grady Judd employed two photographs to help illustrate the difference at a Monday…

The post Watch: FL Sheriff Uses 2 Photos to Show Difference Between a Peaceful Protest and a Riot appeared first on The Western Journal.

via The Western Journal

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.westernjournal.com

AOC reintroduces the Green New Deal to fundamentally transform the US economy

Congressional Democrats, led by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), reintroduced the Green New Deal on Tuesday, a sweeping progressive legislative agenda designed to fundamentally transform the U.S. economy to end capitalism while promoting so-called racial, economic, and climate "justice."

"Not only do we refuse to leave any community behind but those who have been left behind come first," Ocasio-Cortez said at a news conference announcing the reintroduction of the Green New Deal. "We’re going to transition to a 100% carbon-free economy that is more unionized, more just, more dignified and that guarantees more health care and housing than we’ve ever had before. That’s our goal."

More than 100 Democrats are co-sponsoring the reintroduction of the Green New Deal resolution in the House, which comes ahead of a virtual international summit hosted by President Joe Biden to discuss climate change on Earth Day, this Friday.

While President Biden’s administration has not officially endorsed the Green New Deal, the president has signed several executive actions to curb U.S. oil and gas production and increase renewable energy production.

Sen. Markey urged Biden to be willing to go further to address climate change.

"We are going to be calling for the highest aspirations that our country can reach," he said Tuesday. "We want to go big. Even bigger."

Rep. @AOC reintroduces the Green New Deal: ’The climate crisis is a crisis born of injustice and it is a crisis bor… https://t.co/239OuAhpVf

— NowThis (@NowThis)1618932272.0

Ocasio-Cortez first introduced the Green New Deal in 2019 as a nonbinding resolution in the House that broadly outlined a Democratic legislative agenda to remake the economy. The plan sets a goal of "net-zero greenhouse gas emissions" which will be met after a "10-year national mobilization" that would restructure government social programs, vastly expand government power to centrally plan the economy, and dramatically increase federal taxes and spending to fund it all.

The Green New Deal calls for "100 percent of the power demand in the United States" to be met through "clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources." Infrastructure and public transportation would be overhauled to the point where "air travel stops becoming necessary," relying on boondoggles like "high speed rail" and mandates requiring the public to use electric cars to meet the government’s standards. The resolution calls for "all existing buildings" in the United States to be upgraded for maximum energy efficiency.

But the "all hands on deck approach" of the Green New Deal goes well beyond climate policy. Ocasio-Cortez said the Democratic initiative must "rectify the injustices of the past" by providing free higher education for all Americans, "affordable, safe, and adequate" housing, free health care, and millions of "union jobs."

She further added that Green New Deal legislation must address the "systemic cause of climate change."

"While climate change is a planetary crisis, it does not have a random or environmental genesis," she asserted. "It’s not just human-caused, it’s societally-caused. The climate crisis is a crisis born of injustice. And it is a crisis born of the pursuit of profit at any and all human and ecological cost.

"We must recognize in legislation that the trampling of indigenous rights is a cause of climate change. That the trampling of racial justice is a cause of climate change," she continued. "We are allowing folks to deny ourselves human rights and deny people the right to health care, the right to housing and education."

Green New Deal legislation is likely to remain aspirational for Democrats as Republicans are adamantly opposed to these policies, arguing they would make Americans poorer. Sen. John Barasso (R-Wyo.) called it the "Green New Disaster" in a statement responding to Markey and Ocasio-Cortez’s news conference.

The Green New Disaster is back.And if you’re somebody who pays taxes, heats your home, or drives a car…you’re g… https://t.co/DQtnDwQsa0

— Senate Republicans (@Senate Republicans)1618943219.0

"It’s about massively increasing the size of government and dictating how Americans live their lives," Barasso said. "The last thing we need now is to double down on the punishing policies we have already seen from the Biden administration."

Various bills related to Green New Deal policies that have already passed the Democratic-controlled House and have gone nowhere in the U.S. Senate. The Democrats’ narrowest possible 50-50 majority cannot overcome a filibuster threat from Republicans, leaving the viability of a plan to fundamentally restructure the U.S. economy very much in doubt.

For now, the Green New Deal serves as a messaging tool for Democrats to rally their progressive base and Republicans to attack ahead of the 2022 midterm elections.

via Conservative Review

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.conservativereview.com/

COVID-19 And Vaccines: What Do We Really Know?

Last week, UncoverDC reported on the FDA and CDC’s pause of Johnson & Johnson’s (J&J) COVID-19 vaccine due to complications from a severe but rare clotting condition known as cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST), which appeared in combination with a condition called thrombocytopenia (often referred to as immune thrombocytopenic purpura, or ITP).
Essentially, ITP causes the immune system to malfunction and produces antibodies that attack the body’s platelets. The most dangerous complication of ITP is bleeding in the brain, causing a cerebral hemorrhage and catastrophic brain damage or death.

In explaining the pause, the CDC reported seven women suffered thrombotic complications following the J&J vaccine. Although evidence establishes a relationship between COVID-19, thrombolysis and clotting, which is one of the main reasons for sudden decline and death with the virus, the connection between clotting and the three available COVID-19 vaccines in the United States—Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson—is less explicit.

As pandemic research continues, scientists concede that vaccine development against SARS-CoV-2 within a timeframe as tight as the ongoing COVID-19 vaccine campaign makes it difficult to thoroughly understand the long-term effectiveness and potential side effects of the current vaccines. Therefore, it is not unexpected to see complications, including death. The United States, in just four months, has administered approximately 212 million COVID-19 vaccines, with 85.3 million people now fully vaccinated, or 25.7% of the population. According to CDC data, around 85% of those receiving the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine experienced some type of reaction.

Armed with the knowledge, or lack thereof, we have thus far; most scientists would agree that when navigating through catastrophic, life-altering events that transpire quickly, it is important to pause, reflect upon, and study “how did we get here” and “what would we do differently?”

The Vaccine Road That Led Us To Where We Are Now

In Jan. 2020, immediately after China released the genetic sequence of SARS-CoV-2, the race to produce a vaccine got underway. There are close to a dozen COVID-19 vaccines currently approved for use around the world. While there are many different kinds and types of vaccines, they all have the same objective—tricking a healthy body into thinking it is under assault by a particular disease so the immune system will learn to create the cells and proteins needed to immediately fight off the disease if it becomes a threat. Simply put, vaccines are designed to create antibodies that allow the body to protect itself from future infections without actually getting sick.

The current COVID-19 vaccines approved for emergency use in the United States (and therefore do not need FDA approval) are manufactured by J&J, Pfizer, and Moderna. They each work by fooling cells into making spike proteins—the sharp bumps that protrude from the surface of the outer envelope of the coronavirus. These proteins are the pathogens needed to cause the immune system to develop resistance to the virus. For this to happen, DNA or RNA must be injected and delivered to the inside of the cells.

Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca’s vaccines use genetically engineered viruses called adenovirus vectors to serve as a Trojan horse and carry the genetic material to the cells to create spike proteins. The J&J vaccine uses a form of human adenovirus called Ad26, and the AstraZeneca vaccine uses a genetically engineered version of a chimpanzee adenovirus. However, despite being over thirty years in the making, other than for military personnel, no approved adenovirus vaccine is available to the general public, with the technology existing commercially only in a rabies vaccine.

And while not “vaccines” in the traditional sense, using nascent technology, the Pfizer and Moderna shots are gene-modifying agents that insert synthetic, chemically protected mRNA into cells (using a chemical called polyethylene glycol, or PEG). Never before used in an approved vaccine, PEG may be the culprit behind severe allergic reactions in mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Once in the cell, the synthetic mRNA instructs it to produce a protein matching the spike protein found on the outer surface of a SARS-CoV-2 virus molecule. The cells then eject this protein out, which triggers the creation of COVID-19 antibodies.

Hoping to achieve the same goal, both Pfizer and Moderna, who are fierce competitors, are making every effort to be the first company to bring this synthetic mRNA technology to life in a vaccine against COVID-19.

A Closer Look At Moderna, Bill Gates, and Dr. Anthony Fauci

For years, Moderna, under the leadership of Stéphane Bancel (who, along with Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, just announced that a booster shot will probably be necessary for the company’s mRNA vaccines), has been quietly working on advanced protein therapies—a multi-billion dollar industry responsible for drugs like Humara. Confident its technology would level the playing field by creating therapeutic proteins inside the body instead of in a lab and manufacturing facility, Moderna’s mission has hinged on one feat that no biotech facility has successfully accomplished—harnessing mRNA

National Institutes of Health Director Dr. Francis Collins and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Dr. Anthony Fauci meet with Bill Gates of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to discuss research opportunities in global health in June 2017 at NIH. Credit: National Institutes of Health | FlickrCC

Long before the pandemic, Moderna (who shares ownership of its vaccine with Dr. Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, or NIAID) received awards from the federal government, including DARPA, to conduct research on mRNA. In 2016, the notoriously secretive Moderna—a Flagship Pioneering company since 2010, with twenty-one mRNA programs in its pipeline—announced a partnership with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

According to Moderna, the purpose of its collaboration with the Gates Foundation (who also funds the pandemic policy-dictating entity the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, tied to Dr. Anthony Fauci) is “to advance the development of a novel, affordable combination of mRNA-based antibody therapeutics to help prevent HIV infection,” with the potential for future follow-on projects of up to $100 million to “support the development of additional mRNA based projects for various infectious diseases.” At the time of the partnership, Moderna was valued at close to $5 billion, making it worth more than any other private biotech lab in the country.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, along with the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security and the World Economic Forum, sponsored the ‘Global Pandemic Exercise’ Event 201 on Oct. 18, 2019. The pandemic tabletop exercise “simulated a series of dramatic, scenario-based facilitated discussions, confronting difficult, true-to-life dilemmas associated with response to a hypothetical, but scientifically plausible, pandemic.” Three days prior, on Oct. 15, 2019, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) launched a call for proposals to attract funding applications for ground-breaking platform technologies in order to:

“develop vaccines and other immunoprophylactics to rapidly respond to future outbreaks of emerging infectious diseases and unknown pathogens, known as ‘Disease X’.” 

Interestingly, CEPI—which supported the production of Moderna’s vaccine candidate for the Phase 1 clinical trial and is supported by the Biden administration’s National Strategy—was co-founded in 2017 by the governments of Norway and India, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Wellcome, (funded in part by Gates, Wellcome has a £29.1 billion investment portfolio, and is a partner with the ChanZuckerberg Initiative) and the World Economic Forum. Dr. Richard Hatchett, CEO of CEPI, had this to say of the initiative:

“We can be sure that another epidemic is on the horizon. It is not a case of if, but when. We need to be prepared. We need to invest in platform technologies that can be used to quickly respond to the emergence of a pathogen with epidemic potential.”

For decades, Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of the NIAID, has been conducting research on the coronavirus, which was first characterized in the 1960s. Throughout the current pandemic, there have been critical observations surrounding a controversial type of research banned in the U.S. by the Obama administration in 2014, called gain-of-function. The risky research requires taking wild viruses and passing them through live animals until they mutate into a form that could pose a pandemic threat. According to Dr. Peter Navarro, this research genetically engineers a virus to make it more deadly and dangerous—“to weaponize it.”

Effectively side-stepping Obama’s ban on gain-of-function research, Dr. Anthony Fauci and Dr. Francis Collins, at the expense of the U.S. taxpayer, intentionally moved the experiment to China. In fact, an expanding body of evidence suggests that Dr. Fauci funded scientists at the Chinese Communist Party’s Wuhan Institute of Virology and other institutions to work on gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses.

There are also well-documented concerns, examined by Dr. David E. Martin, surrounding COVID-19 and pre-pandemic research, patents, and associations between the NIAID, the University of Chapel Hill (UNC), Harvard University, Emory University, Vanderbilt University, University of Pennsylvania, and Tsinghua University. Martin’s investigation also points to many other research institutions and their commercial affiliations, including that of Peter Daszak, a self-proclaimed “virus hunter” and long-time president of EcoHealth Alliance, a New York-based non-profit whose claimed focus is the business of pandemic prevention.

Watch the latest video at foxnews.com

FDA Aware of Concerns over Clotting after mRNA Vaccines

A Dec. 17, 2020 FDA Briefing Document from Moderna stated numerous times that there were “no known neurologic, neuro-inflammatory, and thrombotic events, that would suggest a causal relationship to the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine.”

Prior to that, on Dec. 8, 2020, in response to an FDA request for comments regarding Pfizer-BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine, Patrick Whelan, M.D., Ph.D., submitted a report intended to alert the agency to the possibility that, instead of creating immunity, COVID-19 mRNA vaccines have the potential to cause injury when instructing the body to make spike proteins. In his letter to the FDA, Whelan, who urged particular caution in the mass vaccination of children before actual safety data is available, stated:

“I am concerned about the possibility that the new vaccines aimed at creating immunity against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (including the mRNA vaccines of Moderna and Pfizer) have the potential to cause microvascular injury (inflammation and small blood clots called microthrombi) to the brain, heart, liver, and kidneys in a way that is not currently being assessed in safety trials of these potential drugs.”

The CDC and the FDA have not issued another statement following their announcement pausing the Johnson & Johnson vaccine.

Researchers Indicate Possible Connection Between Vaccines & Clots

Scientists have offered no conclusive answer to the exact cause of COVID-19 or the reason why a handful of thrombotic events following the receipt of COVID-19 vaccines completely shut down two vaccine trials. Immediately following the pause of its vaccine, J&J released a statement that was met with criticism, declaring:

“We are aware that thromboembolic events including those with thrombocytopenia have been reported with all COVID-19 vaccines.”

Well‐documented cases of ITP have been reported following other drugs and vaccinations, including MMR. However, research suggests that in the absence of testing pre‐vaccination platelet counts prior to COVID-19 vaccination, combined with the time it takes to discover thrombocytopenia, it is difficult to accurately estimate the percentage of secondary ITP incidences following vaccination.

Most recently, on April 16, the New England Journal of Medicine issued an article indicating the cause of blood clots that may be linked with certain coronavirus vaccines, adding that their findings have important implications for treating the condition, regardless of whether vaccines cause it. Even though the link is not yet firm, they’re calling the condition vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia or VITT. It’s characterized by unusual blood clotting combined with a low number of platelets. Patients suffer from dangerous clots and, sometimes, hemorrhaging at the same time.

Where Does All of This Leave Us Right Now?

On average, it takes between ten and twelve years to develop a safe and effective vaccine. In fact, researchers have been searching for a vaccine against HIV—a project supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, CEPI, BARDA, and Dr. Anthony Fauci—since the early 1980s. Unfortunately, so far, they have not been successful. Citing the pandemic, scientists have raced to shorten the time to find a COVID-19 vaccine and suggest accelerating or limiting the typical time it takes to get vaccines approved. Once COVID-19 vaccines are FDA approved and produced, researchers will begin observing the progress of the vaccinated patients, which is Phase IV of vaccine development.

As the current clinical trials on current COVID-19 vaccines continue and new emerging variants spark talks of new vaccines, the bigger question remains—what other circumstances and side effects, besides blood clots, are we overlooking or not yet fully aware of?

The post COVID-19 And Vaccines: What Do We Really Know? appeared first on UncoverDC.

via UncoverDC

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://uncoverdc.com

MSNBC’s Hateful New Host Justifies Hillary Clinton’s ‘Deplorable’ Smear

MSNBC has long displayed its hatred for Trump supporters and it is continuing to show its contempt even now that he is out of office.
On Sunday afternoon’s Alex Witt Reports, MSNBC host Alex Witt brought on political analyst and MSNBC host Mehdi Hassan to go on an unhinged diatribe against Trump voters. The hateful Hassan justified Hillary Clinton labeling Trump supporters “deplorables” because they have “racist, far-right, authoritarian views.”
 
 
Witt initiated Hassan’s despicable monologue by suggesting that Trump “helped to amplify, to unleash” racist and violent behavior.
Among many repulsive comments, Hassan disgustingly defended Clinton’s “deplorables” remark and condescendingly suggested that Trump caused such deplorables “to crawl out from under rocks”: (Click "expand" to read more.) 
This idea that you can beat Donald Trump in an election, put aside the fact that he doesn’t accept the results and insights an insurrection, separate to that, there’s the wider issue of quote unquote Trumpism for want of a better word, which as you say, the unleashing, the amplification of these views. These views have always been there in America. People who point out that, you know, Trump is not new, they’re right. But what happened in recent years is — was they had become taboo, they had become, you know, on the fringes, they weren’t seen as mainstream. What happened under Trump was these people and these views were able to crawl out from under rocks.
They were given amplification, legitimization from the most powerful man in the land. And therefore just beating Donald Trump in an election’s not enough. These people are out there. They turned up in the capital. They represent a big chunk of the country. Whatever you want to call them, you know, Hillary Clinton was famously attacked for talking about a basket of Trump supporters as deplorables. But the reality is there are millions of Americans out there who either support racist, far-right, authoritarian views or are willing to turn a blind eye and still vote for the people pushing those views.
Hasan is fast making a name for himself at MSNBC for making some of the most abhorrent remarks at the network. Just recently, Hasan wrote a nasty piece on MSNBC.com where he attacked liberal Supreme Court justice Stephen Breyer for not stepping down to let President Biden appoint a far-left Supreme Court justice and even mocked the elderly judge for potentially not having much time left on the court due to his age. Hasan has also alleged that “the Republican playbook” is to “make racist policy and then complain about being accused of racism” and advocated for federal and state prosecution of Trump for murder over “avoidable COVID deaths.”
Hasan then went on to blame Republicans for all of the recent political violence and declare that violent rhetoric has “become acceptable on the right”:
But it looks like it’s becoming the new norm where, you know, we look — there’s a line on Twitter that people always eat up — what would you say if you saw this in another country, Alex? What would you say? You would say a failed state. You would say a democracy that’s, you know, a weak democracy in decline. How can you have a country, how can you have a political system where political violence is now part of everyday conversation, is now seen as a tool by members of the electorate, by political groups. And this violence, don’t forget, again has been incited by the former president but not just the former president. You have — you have a GOP official in Michigan — we covered this on my show not long ago, who says burn them at the stake — referring to witches — in Michigan referring to Governor Gretchen Whitmer and Secretary of State and — and the Attorney General who all three of them are women in Michigan. That kind of language that’s become acceptable on right that now right wingers themselves — Republicans themselves having fed the beast are now becoming victim to and now living in fear.
MSNBC does not care about the news but about nastily smearing anyone who opposes the Democrats. 
This hatred was sponsored by Subway and Velveeta. Let them know here if you think they should be sponsoring this content.
Read the full April 18th transcript here:
Alex Witt Reports
4/18/21
1:46:49 PM
ALEX WITT: Is — is it something that — that Donald Trump though helped to amplify, to unleash? In other words, licensing the ability to behave this way — 
MEHDI HASAN (MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST; HOST OF THE MEHDI HASAN SHOW): Yeah.
HASAN: — to express yourself this way? 
HASAN: 100% and this is the big, you know, this was the big issue for many of us when Trump looked like he would be defeated and then was defeated. This idea that you can beat Donald Trump in an election, put aside the fact that he doesn’t accept the results and insights an insurrection, separate to that, there’s the wider issue of quote unquote Trumpism for want of a better word, which as you say, the unleashing, the amplification of these views. These views have always been there in America. 
WITT: Right.
HASAN: People who point out that, you know, Trump is not new, they’re right. But what happened in recent years is — was they had become taboo, they had become, you know, on — on the fringes, they weren’t seen as mainstream. What happened under Trump was these people and these views were able to crawl out from under rocks. They were given amplification, legitimization from the most powerful man in the land. And therefore just beating Donald Trump in an election’s not enough. These people are out there. They turned up in the capital. They represent a big chunk of the country. Whatever you want to call them, you know, Hillary Clinton was famously attacked for talking about a basket of Trump supporters as deplorables. But the reality is there are millions of Americans out there who either support racist, far-right, authoritarian views or are willing to turn a blind eye and still vote for the people pushing those views. Look at the polls Alex. Look at the number of people who think — I think it’s what 50 — nearly 50% of Republicans according to a recent poll thought, you know, what happened on January 6th wasn’t that bad — 
WITT: Yeah.
HASAN: — wasn’t a big deal —
WITT: Yeah. Shocking. 
HASAN: — may have been done by Antifa.
WITT: Yeah. So according to Punchbowl News Mehdi, lawmakers who criticize Trump spent tens of thousands of dollars across the first quarter this year on personal security. You had Democrats like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Eric Swalwell. You had Republicans like Mitt Romney and Liz Cheney. What is this tell you, lawmakers spending money to make sure they can safely work at the capitol or in their home district or just go about their day? Is this the new norm? 
HASAN: It shouldn’t be the new norm. 
WITT: No. 
HASAN: But it looks like it’s becoming the new norm where, you know, we look — there’s a — there’s a line on Twitter that people always eat up — what would you say if you saw this in another country, Alex? What would you say? You would say a failed state. You would say a democracy that’s, you know, a weak democracy in decline. How can you have a country, how can you have a political system where political violence is now part of everyday conversation, is now seen as a tool by members of the electorate, by political groups. And this violence, don’t forget, again has been incited by the former president but not just the former president. You have — you have a GOP official in Michigan — we covered this on my show not long ago, who says burn them at the stake — referring to witches — in Michigan referring to Governor Gretchen Whitmer and Secretary of State and — and the Attorney General who all three of them are women in Michigan. That kind of language that’s become acceptable on right that now right wingers themselves — Republicans themselves having fed the — fed the beast are now becoming victim to and now living in fear. I mean, we talk about cowardly Republicans in Congress who don’t stand up to Trump and co., which is true, but there is also this issue which you point out, which is some of them are literally living in fear of physical violence, of getting killed. And we should have called this out much earlier when Mitt Romney voted against — voted for convicting Donald Trump in the first impeachment trial. You had CPAC saying we can’t guarantee your security and Mitt Romney, you know, when you say stuff like this you’re not welcome in Republican circles. That kind of rhetoric is just not acceptable. 

via NewsBusters – Exposing Liberal Media Bias

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.newsbusters.org/

House Democrats Block McCarthy’s Resolution to Censure Maxine Waters


House Democrats on Tuesday afternoon blocked House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy’s (R-CA) resolution to condemn Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) for allegedly inciting violence.

Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) offered a motion to table McCarthy’s resolution that censures and condemns Waters’ controversial comments over the weekend. Waters would have lost her powerful position as the chair of the House Financial Services Committee if the resolution passed.

The motion to table H.R. 330, McCarthy’s resolution to censure Waters, on party lines; 216 Democrats voted to table the bill, and 210 Republicans voted to have the House consider the bill for a floor vote.

McCarthy introduced the resolution after Waters said outside of a police station in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that she protestors were looking for a “guilty” verdict and urged protesters to get “more confrontational” do not get the verdict they desire.

The resolution reads:

Whereas on the evening of April 17, 2021, Representative Maxine M. Waters of California joined protestors in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, who were gathered outside the Brooklyn Center Police Department.

Whereas Representative Maxine M. Waters said, “We’re looking for a guilty verdict” in the trial of Derek Chauvin.

Whereas Representative Maxine M. Waters said that if there was not a guilty verdict, protestors on the street should “…Stay on the street, and we’ve got to get more active, we’ve got to get more confrontational, we’ve got to make sure they know we mean business.”

Whereas on April 19, 2021, the judge in the trial of Derek Chauvin, Judge Peter Cahill, said in reply to Derek Chauvin’s defense attorney, “I’ll give you that Congresswoman Waters may have given you something on appeal that may result in this whole trial being overturned.”

Whereas Judge Cahill stated, “I wish elected officials would stop talking about this case, especially in a manner that is disrespectful to the rule of law and to the judicial branch and our function.”

Whereas Judge Cahill stated, “I think if they want to give their opinions, they should do so in a respectful, and in a manner that is consistent with their oath to the Constitution. To respect the coequal branch of government. Their failure to do so I think is abhorrent.”

Resolved, That: (1) Representative Maxine M. Waters of California be censured; (2) Representative Maxine M. Waters forthwith present herself in the well of the House for the pronouncement of censure; (3) Representative Maxine M. Waters be censured with the public reading of this resolution by the Speaker.

McCarthy’s resolution particularly served as a difficult resolution for many of the House Democrats’ swing voters; many of these Democrats have broken with their colleagues on votes such as this.

Waters, after the House vote, dismissed the resolution as just “politics.”

Asked by CNN if she regretted the vote coming from her controversial remarks, she said, “No.”

Sean Moran is a congressional reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter @SeanMoran3.

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.breitbart.com

Executive Order Canceling the Constitution


On April 15, Biden signed an Executive Order on Blocking Property with Respect to Specified Harmful Foreign Activities of the Government of the Russian Federation. Contrary to its title, this EO is not about Russia. It is designed to allow the Biden administration to deprive American citizens and organizations of their rights and property by arbitrarily linking those persons to real, imagined, or vaguely defined activities of the Russian government.

The Biden administration unilaterally makes the determination and requires neither criminal acts nor intent. The punishment is blocking assets and a prohibition on any dealing with the accused person. Spouses and adult children of individuals, found guilty by accusation under this EO, are punished, too.

The EO was preceded by some distracting maneuvers, both diplomatic (hostile rhetoric toward Russia) and military (sending naval ships toward the Black Sea and recalling them back, as if dealing with Russian threats). Thus, many people assumed that the EO was directed at Russia, and completely missed the fact that it is directed at dissent here, at home. 

Over the past four years, the Democrat Party, Fake News, and Big Tech have been frequently portraying their opponents as Russian trolls or Russian misinformation operators. The Russian collusion narrative, initially invented to overthrow the Trump administration, has been used to smear many conservative movements. Now this effort has been crowned by an Executive Order. 

Biden’s administration has been recently pushing so many other radical changes, such as packing the Supreme Court, eliminating the filibuster, restricting Second Amendment rights, etc., that the real ramifications of this new EO went completely unnoticed. In my opinion, this EO is the most dangerous of them all. It allows the Biden regime to eliminate its opposition, quickly and quietly.

Section 1 of the EO enumerates prohibited activities and defines guilty persons as those “determined” by the Secretary of Treasury and/or Secretary of State in consultation with the Attorney General to be:

(a)(ii) responsible for or complicit in, or to have directly or indirectly engaged or attempted to engage in, any of the following for or on behalf of, or for the benefit of, directly or indirectly, the Government of the Russian Federation: 

(A)  malicious cyber-enabled activities;

(B)  interference in a United States or other foreign government election;

(C)  actions or policies that undermine democratic processes or institutions in the United States or abroad; 

(D)  transnational corruption;

Some of the language in this EO borrows from another: EO-13224 – Blocking Property and Prohibiting Transactions With Persons Who Commit, Threaten To Commit, or Support Terrorism. George W. Bush signed EO-13224 on September 23, 2001, in response to 9/11.

However, Biden’s EO is as similar to Bush’s EO as an atomic bomb is to a sniper rifle. Bush’s EO targeted financing terrorism. It defined terrorism clearly and narrowly. It minimized legal jeopardy to US persons. It did not strip away the standard for criminal liability requirements of action and intent. It did not target spouses or children of accused individuals. Additionally, Bush made a legally meaningful promise to use it with due regard to culpability and the Bush administration used it with restraint. Even so, Democrats criticized it harshly, opposed it, and fought it in courts.

In contrast, Biden’s new EO is directed mostly at US persons. It criminalizes speech and political activities, based on whimsical and arbitrary definitions. The Biden administration can define “malicious activities,” “democratic processes or institutions,” and the activities that undermine them as it wants. 

The Biden administration is also free to interpret what constitutes “interests of the Russian Government.” Such broad and vague language allows the Biden regime to select US citizens and political organizations arbitrarily, and then deprive them of their property and rights without anything reminiscent of due process. The EO does not even require that anybody commit an actual crime somewhere. False cyber-attribution or fake bounty claims are sufficient. Biden’s remarks to the EO showed no regard to the culpability of any targeted US citizens or other persons.

Leftist pseudo-elites have been eager to ban speech based on allegations that such speech may be beneficial to Russia. Such ideation has been present among Big Tech influencers for a long time. This EO effectively gives Big Tech, banks, and credit card companies a new pretext to deplatform conservatives and anyone else who opposes the Biden regime by claiming that they are now engaged in illegal activity. 

Biden’s EO appears to allow the Democrat party to deny Americans the right to advocate against it in future federal elections. This might be accomplished through a “determination” that Russia is interfering in elections against democratic candidates. Thus, any US citizens who also oppose Democrats could be found to acting for Russia’s benefit, directly or indirectly. 

The list of prohibited activities justifying a Biden administration “determination” to deprive American persons of their property and other rights (referred to here as a “Deprived Person”) states:

       [a] (iii) to be or have been a leader, official, senior executive officer, or member of the board of directors of:
           …   (C)  an entity whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order;

For comparison, Bush’s EO only covered the leaders of terrorist-supporting entities, not multiple officials, executives, or directors.

Unprecedently, Biden’s EO targets children and spouses:

[a] (v)    to be a spouse or adult child of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to subsection (a)(ii) or (iii) of this section;

and countless associations:

[a] (vi)   to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of:

(A)  any activity described in subsection (a)(ii) of this section; or

(B)  any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order

[a] (vii) to be owned or controlled by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, … any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order.

Notice the infinite reach these subsections afford. Those connected to a “Deprived Person” can receive the same designation, and so on. There is no limit to the number of iterations. 

“Deprived Persons” essentially become untouchables, as dealing with them in any way is expressly prohibited without additional determinations:

Sec. 2.  The prohibitions in section 1 of this order include:

(a)  the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; and

(b)  the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person.

Giving legal representation, hosting the website, selling food, and giving medical care to a “Deprived Person” is automatically prohibited. Section 4 prohibits transactions that “cause a violation” of this EO, even absent intent or knowledge. This serves as a hint to pre-emptively cut ties with anyone the Biden regime targets.

Section 9 exempts UN bodies and “related organizations” (NGOs) from any responsibility for interfering in US elections and other activities under this order.

The Russian Federation is mixed into the EO only for distraction and as a primer, triggering expanding layers of culpability. 

I do not expect any putative human rights organizations or large media outlets to hold the Biden regime accountable for how it applies this EO or to defend its victims. So far, these outlets have either ignored it or defended it.

Image by Andrea Widburg

via American Thinker

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.americanthinker.com/

SECOND STUDY This Time From CDC WEBSITE Confirms Stanford Study on Face Masks Being Harmful – Cause Serious Side Effects

More support for health concerns with wearing masks has been uncovered.  This report was published and presented at the CDC website in June 2020.  

It was brought to our attention today, that a report was published at the Hayride in March that is similar to our report from yesterday noted below:

Stanford Study Results: Facemasks are Ineffective to Block Transmission of COVID-19 and Actually Can Cause Health Deterioration and Premature Death

In March, the Hayride reported on the results of another mask study posted on June 10, 2020, at the CDC website.  This study confirms our reporting from yesterday that masks aren’t just a nuisance but can cause serious health problems. The article recently uncovered was published by the CDC and it states in black and white the side-effects of wearing a mask, specifically related to the masks trapping carbon dioxide or CO2.  The article states the masks cause breathing resistance that could result in a reduction in the frequency and depth of breathing, known as hypoventilation, in as little as an hour of wearing a mask.  The article further went on to elaborate on the side-effects of increased CO2 concentrations in the mask wearer that include:

  1. Headache;
  2. Increased pressure inside the skull;
  3. Nervous system changes (e.g., increased pain threshold, reduction in cognition – altered judgement, decreased situational awareness, difficulty coordinating sensory or cognitive, abilities and motor activity, decreased visual acuity, widespread activation of the sympathetic nervous system that can oppose the direct effects of CO2 on the heart and blood vessels);
  4. Increased breathing frequency;
  5. Increased “work of breathing”, which is result of breathing through a filter medium;
  6. Cardiovascular effects (e.g., diminished cardiac contractility, vasodilation of peripheral blood vessels);
  7. Reduced tolerance to lighter workloads.

The Hayride reports:

The Hayride has covered this in the past specifically regarding the cognitive loss caused by COVID masks trapping CO2 where according to a Harvard Study breathing in as little as 945 PPM of CO2 lowers cognitive ability 15% and at 1400 PPM of CO2 cognitive ability reduces by 50%… What is also disturbing is not only the brain damage that is caused by the masks, but the adverse cardiovascular effects on the heart and lungs along with the reduction of blood sugar and dehydration.

We also discovered that the Stanford report from our article yesterday was censored by Twitter last week when former Trump campaign staffer, Steve Cortes, tweeted out the results of this study.

Why are US medical experts not telling Americans of the dangers of wearing masks?   Why is Big Tech censoring this message?

The post SECOND STUDY This Time From CDC WEBSITE Confirms Stanford Study on Face Masks Being Harmful – Cause Serious Side Effects appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com

Apple tells GOP lawmakers Parler is approved to come back to its app store

Apple will allow Parler, the pro-free speech alternative social media app favored by conservatives and Trump supporters, back on to its iOS app store, the tech giant told Republican lawmakers Monday.

Parler was kicked off the iOS Store in the days following the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol after Apple accused the company of failing to moderate violent content on its platform. Until now, Parler users have been unable to download the app on iOS devices. Apple had said Parler would not be allowed back in its store until the company made changes to comply with the App Store Review guidelines.

"There is no place for hateful, racist, discriminatory content on the App Store," Apple reportedly told Parler last month.

But in a letter responding to an inquiry from Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) about Apple’s actions toward Parler, Apple Senior Director of Government Affairs for the Americas Timothy Powderly said his company has been "engaged in substantial conversation" with Parler about bringing the app into compliance with its guidelines.

"As a result of those conversations, Parler has proposed updates to its app and the app’s content moderation practices, and the App Review Team has informed Parler as of April 14, 2021 that its proposed update app will be approved for reinstatement to the App Store," Powderly wrote.

He added that Apple expects the updated Parler app to become available as soon as Parler releases it.

Rep. Buck tweeted that the reinstatement of Parler’s app is a "huge win for free speech."

He also said it’s "time for Google and Amazon to follow Apple’s lead. Stop the censorship."

Around the same time Parler was kicked off the Apple App Store in January, Google dropped the app from its store and Amazon Web Services booted Parler from its web hosting services, effectively taking the website off the internet and forcing Parler to search for a new host.

Politico reported that Google sent a letter to Congress on Friday telling lawmakers that Parler is still not in compliance with its content moderation rules.

"Parler’s app has not yet complied with those policies, and that is why it remains suspended," said Mark Isakowitz, Google vice president of government affairs and public policy.

A spokesman for Google told Politico that Parler’s app will be welcomed back on the Google Play store "once it submits an app that complies with our policies."

There is no word on whether Amazon will allow Parler to return to its web services. In March, Parler filed a lawsuit against Amazon in the federal court for the Western District of Washington alleging defamation and breach of contract by Amazon.

A representative for Amazon said last March that Parler’s lawsuit was meritless and that it was clearly demonstrable that content on Parler "encouraged or incited violence against others" in violation of Amazon’s terms of service.

via Conservative Review

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.conservativereview.com/

VIDEO: Driver trying to get home comes face to face with bikers in BLM march. No one moves out of the way — then things turn ugly.

Cellphone video caught the moment things got ugly between an SUV driver trying to get home and several motorcyclists involved in a Black Lives Matter march.

And it all went down in Stillwater, Minnesota — population about 20,000 and around 30 minutes east of Minneapolis.

What happened?

Video posted Saturday to Twitter begins with the angry driver exiting his vehicle after apparently trying to left turn on Stillwater Avenue — but police told TheBlaze Monday that the trio of bikers in front him were trying to make a left as well.

A fourth biker actually had already turned left and was past the driver’s vehicle on the other street:

Image source: Twitter video screenshot via @KBoomhauer

The bikers may have been expecting the driver to back up or get out the way; they certainly didn’t seem to be giving him a passage.

But not this time. The driver began yelling at the bikers that "I live here!" and pointed down the road.

Image source: Twitter video screenshot via @KBoomhauer

With that a large biker in a dark vest — who stood a few inches taller than the motorist — appeared to challenge the driver and told him, "I don’t give a f***." But the driver got up in the biker’s face and moved forward on him until the biker shoved the driver.

Image source: Twitter video screenshot via @KBoomhauer

Then a bigger shoving match ensued:

Image source: Twitter video screenshot via @KBoomhauer

And by the time police arrived, the motorist may have appeared to be the aggressor:

Image source: Twitter video screenshot via @KBoomhauer

Because police took the motorist away:

Image source: Twitter video screenshot via @KBoomhauer

Here’s the clip. Content warning: Language:

BLM group has assaulted someone in his own neighborhood trying to get home. Police come and detain the man who was… https://t.co/7xtzt4727y

— Cat Hyde Кот Хайд (I’m just here for my ban)?? (@Cat Hyde Кот Хайд (I’m just here for my ban)??)1618705184.0

Police told TheBlaze on Monday that they detained the driver briefly, got him and his vehicle home safely after the march went through the intersection, and that there were no charges, citations, or arrests. Police also told TheBlaze that it’s commonplace for streets to be blocked during marches.

Oh, there’s more

There are two other videos showing the march. In one video, a woman on a megaphone tells the marchers about "an angry motorist who refused to move his car. The police were on the scene, and lo and behold, a miracle of God, they took him away, put him in the back of a squad car, they moved his vehicle out of the street so we can peacefully continue our march!"

And in the other clip, a man on a megaphone hollers at residents, "If you think black lives matter, you can come march with us, you can come join us. If you don’t, you can stay up at your house. You can stay up in your driveway looking at us like we’re doing something crazy when we’re just here trying to fight for our lives."

Earlier: "If you think black lives matter you can come march with us, you can come join us. If you don’t you can st… https://t.co/zNv4T8vztE

— Cat Hyde Кот Хайд (I’m just here for my ban)?? (@Cat Hyde Кот Хайд (I’m just here for my ban)??)1618707404.0

via Conservative Review

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.conservativereview.com/