Categories
Reprints from others.

Tuesday. Nice News.

This is a reprint from Nice News.

Wake up to good news.

Today’s News

Today's News

How One Man Started the Global Little Free Library Movement

Acts of Kindness Acts of Kindness
Image Credit: Madalyn Cox

How One Man Started the Global Little Free Library Movement

Perhaps you’ve seen them while walking your neighborhood. A Little Free Library, each one a different color and size, all standing on people’s lawns and containing books. Though unique in style, these small boxes share the same vision: take a book, share a book.

Founded in 2009 by the late Todd H. Bol, he created the inaugural library in honor of his schoolteacher mother. Three years after the little library was placed in his front yard, a non-profit was launched. Bol died in 2018 at age 62 from complications of pancreatic cancer, but not before he saw his creation impact the world—more than 75,000 Little Free Libraries had been registered globally, across 88 countries.

His inspiring life story is one we should all take a page out of. “I really believe in a Little Free Library on every block and a book in every hand,” said Bol, who had hope for humanity coming together. “I believe people can learn from each other, and see that they have a better place on this planet to live.”

How to Build One

Billionaire Mark Cuban Launches Online Pharmacy Offering Low-Cost Generic Meds

Health & Wellness Health & Wellness
Image Credit: Steven Ferdman/Getty Images

Billionaire Mark Cuban Launches Online Pharmacy Offering Low-Cost Generic Meds

Mark Cuban has created a cure for avoiding inflated medication costs. The Billionaire investor’s Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company (MCCPDC) launched an online pharmacy that will help provide more affordable pharmaceutical drugs to millions of Americans.

MCCPDC is a registered pharmaceutical wholesaler, meaning it is able to bypass the middleman—and the increased markup costs as a result. The first inventory included 100 generic meds, all sold at manufacturer prices in addition to a 15 percent margin and pharmacist fee. MCCPDC CEO Alex Oshmyansky said in a statement: “The markup on potentially lifesaving drugs that people depend on is a problem that can’t be ignored. It is imperative that we take action and help expand access to these medications for those who need them most.”

Learn More

19-Year-Old Sets Record as Youngest Woman to Fly Solo Around the World

Culture Culture
Image Credit: JOHN THYS/AFP via Getty Images

19-Year-Old Sets Record as Youngest Woman to Fly Solo Around the World

She may have done it alone, but Zara Rutherford now has the entire world cheering her on. At age 19, the Belgian-British pilot has set a world record: she’s the youngest woman to fly around the world solo. After 155 days traveling the globe in her small Shark microlight plane, she returned home to Belgium on Thursday.

Her arrival was months later than intended, but the memories made and sights seen across five continents will last a lifetime. The teen, whose parents are also pilots, is encouraging of other young women who have an interest in the aviation industry. “Go for it,” she said. “It takes a lot of time, patience, a lot of work, but it is incredible.” Her sights are now set on attending university this fall, and there’s no doubt she’ll soar at whatever she does.

See Her Arrival Home

Massive Gas Planet Discovered That Is ‘Relatively Close to Earth

Science Science
Image Credit: Nastco / iStock

Massive Gas Planet Discovered That Is “Relatively Close to Earth”

A new discovery has been made that is out of this world. This month, it was announced that a gigantic gas planet has been discovered. The planet, called TOI-2180 b, is almost three times more massive than Jupiter—known to be the biggest planet in the solar system.

Found by a UC Riverside astronomer and group of scientists, the planet is considered a “rare” finding. Paul Dalba, a UCR astronomer, says “It hits the trifecta of 1) having a several-hundred-day orbit, 2) being relatively close to Earth (379 lightyears is considered close for an exoplanet), and 3) us being able to see it transit in front of its star.”

It’s a reminder that there is still galaxies-worth of information yet to be explored in space.

Be Amazed

Post of the day

Post of the day

@nicenewshq

“Instacart worker Jessica Higgs was delivering an order of groceries for an elderly customer when she noticed something didn’t feel right. Because she listened to her gut and chose to speak up, Higgs saved two people from a potentially fatal propane leak.”

Quote of the day

Quote of the day
“Dream as if you’ll live forever. Live as if you’ll die today.”
– James Dean

Categories
How funny is this? Reprints from others. Uncategorized

How funny is this? Thank You Gateway Pundit.

Thank You GP.

In June, Biden fell off his bike at a complete stop while surrounded by reporters.

 

Secret Service swooped in and ensured Biden was not injured after he toppled onto the aspha

 

 

The bike fall escalated concerns about Biden’s frailty after he has been seen tripping on the stairs leading to Air Force One on several occasions.

Biden’s handlers allowed him to ride in public again last week. He was heckled while riding on a path by his home.

Heckler: “Hey, where your f***ing training wheels at?”

Now the #BidenBikeChallenge is becoming a trend in Delaware.

People are taking photos of themselves lying down in the same spot where Biden toppled onto the asphalt.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Categories
Elections Opinion Politics Reprints from others.

Four Big Questions For Election Fraud Deniers The same Democrats who appeared in HBO’s “Kill Chain” now tell you that “2000 Mules” is a hoax!

This is a reprint from

Emerald Robinson’s The Right Way

This is how she sees The election fraud.

 

QUESTION #1: Why do Democrats continue to insist that election fraud does not exist — and that such “baseless claims” have been “debunked” — when prominent Democrats insisted (in 2017 and 2018 and 2019 and 2020) that election fraud does exist and it’s a very big problem?

 

 

Did they all forget that we live in the age of video playback?

Did they all suffer from simultaneous amnesia about the hearings they held, the expert witnesses they gathered, and the interviews they gave (for documentaries like HBO’s “Kill Chain: The Cyber War on America’s Elections”) during the Trump Administration?

Twitter avatar for @impactusa8IMPACT USA 🇺🇸🍊 @impactusa8

Democrats say election fraud is Real

Thank you Kamala Harris! Thank you Amy Klobuchar! Thank you Ron Wyden! Thank you Mark Warner! Thank you Stacey Abrams!

Thank you, HBO! Thank you, New York Times! Thank you, NBC News! Thank you, Atlanta Journal-Constitution! Thank you, CNN! Thank you, PBS!

Thank you all for being election deniers before you became election fraud deniers!


QUESTION #2: Why were 78 million American votes from 800 counties in seven states sent overseas to be “handled” by a bankrupt Spanish company in Barcelona called SCYTL in 2020? Why is SCYTL’s biggest customer the Department of Defense? Why would the Department of Defense subcontract the “processing” of 78 million American votes to a foreign company?

For that matter, why is the Department of Defense involved in our elections at all?

Emerald Robinson’s The Right Way
America’s Elections Are Rigged (And Everybody Knows It)
If you want to unravel the mysterious results of the 2020 election, you must begin by asking a simple question: why were 78 million American votes from 800 counties in 7 states sent overseas to be “handled” by a bankrupt Spanish company in Barcelona…

Read more


QUESTION #3: Why did the Associated Press just publish an article that admitted Dominion voting machines are vulnerable to hacking — and must be fixed immediately with software patches in 16 states? Why did the federal government’s own cybersecurity agency (CISA) send out a bulletin to state election officials on June 3rd that warned them about nine security vulnerabilities that must be addressed?

From the AP article:

ATLANTA (AP) — Electronic voting machines from a leading vendor used in at least 16 states have software vulnerabilities that leave them susceptible to hacking if unaddressed, the nation’s leading cybersecurity agency says in an advisory sent to state election officials.

The U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency, or CISA, said there is no evidence the flaws in the Dominion Voting Systems’ equipment have been exploited to alter election results. The advisory is based on testing by a prominent computer scientist and expert witness in a long-running lawsuit that is unrelated to false allegations of a stolen election pushed by former President Donald Trump after his 2020 election loss.

The advisory, obtained by The Associated Press in advance of its expected Friday release, details nine vulnerabilities and suggests protective measures to prevent or detect their exploitation. Amid a swirl of misinformation and disinformation about elections, CISA seems to be trying to walk a line between not alarming the public and stressing the need for election officials to take action.

Didn’t the Associated Press (and all the rest of the corrupt corporate media) spend the last 18 months telling the world that anyone who questioned the security of our elections was a conspiracy theorist?


QUESTION #4: Why has a federal judge in Georgia refused to release a report by a cybersecurity expert who inspected Dominion voting machines and found them vulnerable to hacking and manipulation?

Why is Judge Amy Totenberg opposed to the public release of J. Alex Halderman’s special report regarding the vulnerability of electronic voting machines?

Emerald Robinson’s The Right Way
The Federal Government Admits: Voting Machines Can Be Hacked!
President Trump blasted out my Substack article “Something Stinks in Georgia” (120,000 page views and climbing!) to his followers on TruthSocial yesterday — and it sent Biden’s unpaid staff in the media into a frenzy. Discredited media outlets for beta-males and aging hippies like…

Read more

Why has Judge Totenberg denied a request by the Louisiana secretary of state to review the special report? (Louisiana uses Dominion voting machines as well.) Why has Judge Totenberg denied access to the Halderman report to media outlets as well?

Media outlets such as Fox News and One America News (OAN) are currently being sued for defamation by Dominion — and a federal judge is refusing to release a report that reportedly shows the Dominion machines are not secure?

Think about it.


Categories
Reprints from others. The Courts Uncategorized

Federal Judge: Biden Admin Must Cooperate With Social Media Collusion Lawsuit.

Reprint from Pagegoo

Missouri and Louisiana filed a lawsuit against members of the Biden administration alleging collusion with Big Tech companies to censor speech.

The lawsuit alleges that “the Biden Administration colluded with and pressured social media giants Meta, Twitter, and Youtube to suppress and censor free speech on topics like the Hunter Biden laptop story, the Lab Leak Theory, and more.”

Attorney General Eric Schmitt provided examples of censorship in a Twitter thread.

A federal judge just ruled that the Biden administration must comply with the lawsuit and provide information.

Epoch Times reported:

A federal judge ordered the Biden administration on July 12 to comply with information requests in a lawsuit brought by Missouri and Louisiana officials about alleged federal government collusion with social media companies to suppress important news stories in the name of fighting so-called misinformation.

The lawsuit could help bring to light the Biden administration’s behind-the-scenes efforts to discourage the dissemination of information related to the advent of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus that causes the disease COVID-19 and the ongoing Hunter Biden laptop scandal, according to Eric Schmitt, Missouri’s Republican attorney general.

According to court documents, the states allege that the administration “colluded with and/or coerced social media companies to suppress disfavored speakers, viewpoints, and content on social media platforms by labeling the content ‘disinformation,’ ‘misinformation,’ and ‘malinformation.’”

Missouri Attorney General celebrated the ruling.

“A federal court granted our request for discovery & documents from top ranking Biden officials & social media companies to get to the bottom of their collusion to suppress & censor free speech.

No one has had the chance to look under the hood before – now we do.”

 

Categories
Corruption Food Politics Reprints from others.

OOPS! Police Open Fire on Farmer, Claim Tractor Was Coming at Them – The Video Tells Different Story

Police in the Netherlands opened fire Tuesday on farmers in tractors protesting the country’s radical policies on reducing emissions.

The incident occurred around 10:40 p.m. that day in the town of Heerenveen when a group of farmers on a tractor allegedly tried to crash into police officers and their vehicles near the entrance to the A32 highway, Friesland police announced Tuesday.

Police said that they fired warning shots and shots targeting the tractor during the incident. The farmers fled from the scene once their tractor was hit.

Police later apprehended the tractor riders, according to local law enforcement, about 4 miles away from Heerenveen. Officers arrested three people in connection with the encounter.

The arrested comprised of a 46-year-old man, a 34-year-old man and a 16-year-old boy, according to a Tuesday news release from the Friesland police.

“The investigation into the incident is ongoing. This is an investigation led by the public prosecutor into the facts and circumstances,” police said.

Depending on the investigation’s results, “it will become clear whether the persons will be detained longer or not,” the news release stated.

The Epoch Times disputed local law enforcement’s account of events, pointing to footage of the incident on Twitter.

Here is the link to watch the incident on twitter.

*English translation: Because an officer fired shots, the National Criminal Investigation Department was informed to conduct an independent investigation. There is no more information at the moment.

The Epoch Times said the footage “does not clearly show the vehicle approaching either officers or service vehicles.”

News of the Tuesday encounter came as farmers across the country took to the streets with their cattle and farming equipment in the last few weeks to protest against the Dutch government’s plan to lower nitrogen oxide and ammonia emissions by 50 percent by 2030.

As previously reported by The Western Journal, the plan entailed cutting nitrogen oxides and ammonia by up to 70 percent in areas near protected nature regions. The figure went up to 95 percent in some areas.

In a statement last month, the Dutch government said, “The honest message … is that not all farmers can continue their business,” The Associated Press reported.

According to the wire service, the government said that farmers who survived the anti-pollution crackdowns would have to change their way of farming.

Angered by being forced to bear the brunt of anti-pollution policies, farmers marched near politicians’ homes in protest, smeared manure on roads and blocked traffic on highways and near the border crossing with Germany.

According to the German news agency Deutsche Welle, they also blocked access to supermarket distribution centers.

Dutch politicians have publicly condemned such protests, with Prime Minister Mark Rutte saying on June 29 during a news conference in Madrid, “You can demonstrate, but in a civilized way.”

“So don’t block highways, don’t set off fireworks outside a minister’s house and spread manure and … scare two children, and endanger families,” Rutte said.

Friesland Police did not respond to the Times’ request for comment.

Categories
Reprints from others.

What Liberals Get Wrong About the Second Amendment

An Ann Coulter original article.

Must we really respond to the “musket” argument again?

Apparently so. It’s all the rage among Democrats right now.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (Democrat) and Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker (Democrat) both think it’s quite brilliant to claim that, if we care what the framers of the Constitution meant, then the Second Amendment applies only to “muskets”!

In The New York Times, a couple of professors (Democrats, but you knew that) asked: “Is a modern AR-15-style rifle relevantly similar to a Colonial musket? In what ways?” They liked their argument so much, the op-ed was titled, “A Supreme Court Head-Scratcher: Is a Colonial Musket ‘Analogous’ to an AR-15?”

[Frantically waving my hand]: Yes, professors, it’s exactly analogous.

The Second Amendment does not refer to “muskets”; it refers to “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.” “Bear” means to carry, so any handheld firearm carried by the military can be carried by the people. Just as the musket was once carried by our military, the AR-15 is a handheld arm (technically, the less powerful version of the automatic M-16) carried by our military today. As soon as the U.S. military goes back to muskets, then muskets it is!

But I’m not here to refute idiotic arguments. These guys may as well claim that the First Amendment protects only speech delivered in pamphlets and sermons, but nothing communicated on television, the internet, or with poster boards and Magic Markers.

The Second Amendment is nearly the only prescriptive policy in a document that liberals have been trying to pump their nutty ideas into for 50 years. Unfortunately for them, there’s nothing in the Constitution about a right to dance naked in strip clubs, contraception, marriage or sticking a fork in a baby’s head.

But on the right to bear arms, our Delphic framers were nearly Tolstoyian with their explosion of words: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” (An earlier draft of the amendment specifically defined “militia” as “composed of the body of the people,” but was rejected as redundant.)

In the boldest affirmation of their worldview, the framers announced our natural, God-given right to self-defense — against the government, against criminals, and against assailants the government can’t or won’t stop. Free people prepared to defend themselves are the nucleus of the republic. It’s the most beautiful thing in the whole Constitution. Here, at last, the Founding Fathers told us something specific they want us to do: Teach the boys to shoot. 

 

The “right to bear muskets” crowd — protected by taxpayer-supported armed guards, or cordoned off from the public by phalanxes of security officers in the lobby of, for example, NBC’s television studios in Rockefeller Center, before they return to their homes in crime-free, lily-white neighborhoods — tell us to focus on the freakishly rare mass shooting.

The highest estimates of mass shootings — including by gang warfare, drive-bys, drug wars and domestic murder-suicides — put the number of deaths at under 400 per year, or approximately the same number of Americans who drown in swimming pools every year. Four hundred, out of more than 20,000 murders annually.

Which is why, despite the media’s best effort to terrify suburban moms about weirdos shooting at crowds, nearly half of Americans prefer self-reliance to the government taking away our guns and promising to protect us.

In 2020, the Year of Our Floyd, gun sales went through the roof. The previous high for gun sales was in 2016, with about 16 million guns sold. But in 2020, as BLM tore through our cities, Americans bought 22.8 million guns. The following year saw the second-highest record for gun sales, at 19.9 million purchases.

 

 

By now, 44% of Americans report living in a gun-owning household. Thirty-two percent say they personally own a gun.

As much as I’d like to institutionalize the crazies — for their sake, as well as ours — the risks from bad faith actors at present are too high. With anti-gun zealots on the rampage and the U.S. attorney general siccing the FBI on parents who complain at local school board meetings, the most likely result would be marijuana-crazed schizophrenics continuing about their days unmolested, while gun owners get locked up.

In any event, it appears that the lunatics aren’t heavily armed, anyway. Here’s a demographic breakdown of gun ownership in 2022, according to Gallup:

Republicans 50%

Democrats 18%

**             **             **

Conservatives 45% (Oddly, Gallup calls them “self-identified conservatives,” as if Gallup would never use this cruel epithet without consent of the accused.)

Liberals 15%

**             **             **

Men 45%

Women 19%

**             **             **

Southerners 40%

Eastern residents 21%

Gallup left out one category. The subgroup most likely to own a whole buttload of guns, but not admit it: gang members and other recidivist felons protected by George Gascon and other Soros D.A.s.

Being a rational people, Americans are more worried about those guys than the random rifle-bearing psycho in a woman’s dress.

     COPYRIGHT 2022 ANN COULTER

Categories
Elections Reprints from others. Science

Uh Oh — U.S. Officials Announce More Steps Against Monkeypox Outbreak

From CBS and elsewhere:
WHO Monkeypox
This 2003 electron microscope image made available by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows mature, oval-shaped monkeypox virions, left, and spherical immature virions, right, obtained from a sample of human skin associated with the 2003 prairie dog outbreak.  Cynthia S. Goldsmith, Russell Regner/CDC via AP, file
Reacting to a surprising and growing monkeypox outbreak, U.S. health officials on Tuesday expanded the group of people recommended to get vaccinated against the monkeypox virus.
They also said they are providing more monkeypox vaccine, working to expand testing, and taking other steps to try to get ahead of the outbreak.
“We will continue to take aggressive action against this virus,” said Dr. Ashish Jha, White House COVID-19 response coordinator, who has also been playing a role in how the government deals with monkeypox.
The administration said it was expanding the pool of people who are advised to get vaccinated to include those who may realize on their own that they could have been infected. That includes men who who have recently had sex with men at parties or in other gatherings in cities where monkeypox cases have been identified.
Most monkeypox patients experience only fever, body aches, chills and fatigue. People with more serious illness may develop a rash and lesions on the face and hands that can spread to other parts of the body. The disease is endemic in parts of Africa, where people have been infected through bites from rodents or small animals. It does not usually spread easily among people.
Last month, cases began emerging in Europe and the United States. Many but not all of those who contracted the virus had traveled internationally. Most were men who have sex with men, but health officials stress that anyone can get monkeypox.
Case counts have continued to grow. As of Tuesday, the U.S. had identified 306 cases in 27 states and the District of Columbia. More than 4,700 cases have been found in more than 40 other countries outside the areas of Africa where the virus is endemic.
There have been no U.S. deaths and officials say the risk to the American public is low. But they are taking steps to assure people that medical measures are in place to deal with the growing problem.One of the steps was to expand who is recommended to get vaccinated. Vaccines customarily are given to build immunity in people before they are ever infected. But if given within days or even a few weeks of first becoming infected, some vaccines can reduce severity of symptoms. A two-dose vaccine, Jynneos, is approved for monkeypox in the U.S. The government has many more doses of an older smallpox vaccine ACAM2000 that they say could also be used, but that vaccine is considered to have a greater risk of side effects and is not recommended for people who have HIV.
So it’s the Jynneos vaccine that officials have been trying to use as a primary weapon against the monkeypox outbreak. So far, the government has deployed over 9,000 doses of vaccine. U.S. officials on Tuesday said they are increasing the amount of Jynneos vaccine they are making available, allocating 56,000 doses immediately and about 240,000 more over the coming weeks. They promised more than 1 million more over the coming months. Officials said limited Jynneos doses will be allocated “using a four-tier distribution strategy that prioritizes jurisdictions with the highest case rates of monkeypox,” and that the number of doses distributed would be based on the number of people at risk for monkeypox and on how many of them can’t get ACAM2000 because of HIV.
That suggests the largest number of doses might go to states like New York, California and Illinois, each of which has reported more than 40 cases. However, officials on Tuesday did not say exactly which jurisdictions would be at the top of the list.
David Harvey, executive director of the National Coalition of STD Directors, was critical of the government’s announcement. “We have more questions than ever about how this vaccine will make it to those most at-risk in an equitable way and how the U.S. will ramp up testing and provide access to the best therapeutics,” Harvey said in a statement.
Another change announced Tuesday: Until now, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has advised that vaccines be given after exposure to people whom health officials identify as close personal contacts of cases. But on Tuesday, CDC officials say they are expanding the recommendation to people who were never identified but may realize on their own that they may have been infected.
That can include men who have sex with men who have recently had multiple sex partners in a venue where there was known to be monkeypox or in an area where monkeypox is spreading.
“It’s almost like we’re expanding the definition of who a contact might be,” said the CDC’s Jennifer McQuiston. If people have been to a party or other place where monkeypox has been known to spread “we recommend they come in for a vaccine,” she said.The CDC’s expansion follows similar steps taken in New York City and the District of Columbia.The District of Columbia has identified 19 cases, but case-tracking investigations revealed that some of the infected men had been in gatherings where they were hugging, kissing or in other forms of close intimate contact with people they didn’t know, said Anil Mangla of the D.C. health department.
It was clear that “we were missing something here,” and needed to start offering services to others, said Mangla, an epidemiologist.
Last Thursday, New York City’s health department — armed with 1,000 of doses of Jynneos from the federal government — announced it was opening a temporary clinic to offer the vaccine to all gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men who have had multiple or anonymous sex partners in the previous two weeks.
But all the appointments quickly filled up that day, and the last round of appointments was Monday. “Until we receive more supply we are unable to release additional vaccination appointments,” said Patrick Gallahue, a spokesman for the city’s health department, in an email.
On Monday, the District of Columbia’s health department took a similar step. The department started taking appointments at 1 p.m. Monday but had to stop after 20 minutes, Mangla said.
The department only had 200 doses of Jynneos, and it was clear at the point that it the department didn’t have the vaccine supply or staffing to continue to sign up new people, he said.

Hmm… wonder if we’ll get a new lockdown…just in time for the General Election, maybe?
Or maybe they want to get rid of these men, like with Aids?

Categories
Back Door Power Grab Corruption Crime Faked news How sick is this? Reprints from others. The Courts

Proud Boys Proven INNOCENT in Newly Released VIDEO Hidden from Public! — DOJ Tried to Hide This Evidence! BLOWS UP DOJ and Liz Cheney’s Bogus SEDITIOUS CONSPIRACY Charges

Five of these indicted men currently sit in pre-trial detention. They include Proud Boy Chairman Enrique Tarrio and his pals Joseph Biggs, Ethan Nordean, Dominic Pezzola and Zachary Rehl.

This recorded Zoom meeting was leaked by an Indicted Proud Boy that had viewed it live.

The Department of Justice had confiscated this video from the phone of Proud Boy Chairman Enrique Tarrio and hidden it from the public.

Luckily, these DOJ geniuses did not realize it still lived on a hidden YouTube link or they surely would have forced their minions at YouTube to take it down.

In the video, Proud Boy Chairman Enrique Tarrio said:

“We are never going to be the ones to cross the police barrier, or to cross something in order to get to somebody… We’re always going to be the ones standing back, right? We are always going to be the ones to f**king defend.”

The group then proceeds to discuss how they will defend themselves against Antifa attackers and avoid getting stabbed by not wearing their normal uniforms of black and yellow so they blend in.

They discuss the importance of organization, group leaders and formation. They drill in the importance of staying sober as to stay out of trouble. They pledge to stay away from women and avoid “normies” (non-Proud Boys) so they can march in an actual straight line and avoid losing each other on the day of the march. They discuss the danger of wandering off alone to “take a leak”. They mention how charming they are. They insult a female that irritated them at a past rally. They chat about going to the Dollar Tree store to purchase cutting boards to put in their shirts to act as stab-proof vests in case of an Antifa attack (multiple Proud Boys were stabbed at a rally only a few weeks prior to this meeting by Antifa infiltrators). They talk about “beer tax” and poke fun at each other. They barely mention the Capitol or President Trump.

There is no evidence pointing to a group planning on taking over the government.

Yet, the maniacal prosecution and January 6th Selective Misinformation Committee have literally alluded to a baseless conspiracy theory that a drinking fraternity (the Proud Boys) and Oath Keepers somehow magically assisted President Trump in an “insurrection”. The government, Liz Cheney and Merrick Garland’s DOJ have been planting these seeds in the minds of their minions in the fake news and spreading this misinformation everywhere.

In fact, prosecutors stated on the record that the Proud Boys began planning the Capitol Attack on December 19th, 2020, directly after President Trump tweeted to his followers to come to Washington DC on January 6th.

Yet, this video was taken eleven days after that and shows NO CONSPIRACY TO EVEN ENTER THE CAPITOL.

The Indicted Members of the Proud Boy Drinking Fraternity, now know to the Biden Regime as “Seditious Conspirators”. A new video proves innocence.

“This video should prove once and for all to your liberal and moderate friends what demonic liars these people are,” said Tina Ryan of Citizens Against Political Persecution.

“They conscientiously FRAMED INNOCENT MEN- innocent American Citizens- for political power and gain. This will go down in history as one of the most organized attacks on the American people by their own Government.”

Apparently, a reporter at the New York Times was also able to view the video after the very recent leak. We assume he was very surprised (to say the least) by its contents. Only a few days prior the New York Times had published a hit piece on the Proud Boys, including a video called “How the Proud Boys Breached the Capitol on Jan. 6: Rile Up the Normies.”

“After viewing this new evidence that the government withheld from the media and manipulated in court documents, perhaps this particular journalist realized the media has been misled by the Department of Justice.” said Ryan. “It seems he is fair in this new piece.”

See the blurbs below in italics from Alan Feuer’s New York Times article:

“The meeting, on Dec. 30, 2020, marked the founding of a special new chapter of the Proud Boys called the Ministry of Self-Defense. The team of several dozen trusted members was intended, Mr. Tarrio told his men, to bring a level of order and professionalism to the group’s upcoming march in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021, that had, by his own account, been missing at earlier Proud Boys rallies in the city.

Over nearly two hours, Mr. Tarrio and his leadership team — many of whom have since been charged with seditious conspiracy — gave the new recruits a series of directives: Adopt a defensive posture on Jan. 6, they were told. Keep the “normies” — or the normal protesters — away from the Proud Boys’ marching ranks. And obey police lines.

The prosecution has claimed that the Proud Boys began to plan their assault as early as Dec. 19, 2020 — the day that President Donald J. Trump posted a tweet announcing his Jan. 6 rally and saying it would be “wild.” But the video conference shows that, just one week before the event, when Mr. Tarrio and other Proud Boys leaders gathered their team for a meeting, they spent most of their time discussing things like staying away from alcohol and women and taking measures to ensure their own security.

The recorded meeting makes no mention of any planning that might have occurred in the week directly before the Capitol attack. And while Mr. Tarrio suggests during the meeting that the complex structure he created for the Ministry of Self-Defense was meant to be self-protective — not offensive — in nature, prosecutors have claimed that the group’s “command and control” design was instrumental in facilitating the Capitol attack.

Lawyers for the Proud Boys say the recorded meeting is a key piece of exculpatory evidence, contradicting claims by the government that a conspiracy to attack the Capitol was hatched several weeks before Jan. 6.” 

YES- that was from the New York Times. Liberals read that.

The January 6th Committee is panicking as their lies are finally being revealed in the mainstream media.

*Please see the entire UNEDITED version of the video here. We want to give you the option of seeing the video in its entirety so you know that nothing of importance was edited out.

Warning-this video may incriminate these men for having filthy mouths and offensive speech habits, but NOT of Seditious Conspiracy!

This video has been mentioned in court hearings but was not available to the public.

The prosecution had viewed the recording in its entirety, and cherry-picked out bits to misconstrue evidence to incriminate the defendants.

“These sick demonic people literally knew the Proud Boys were never planning on going inside the Capitol,” said Tina Ryan of Citizens Against Political Persecution. “They saw this tape. Yet they made the conscious decision to manipulate the contents of this video and present it to the judge and the public with the malicious intent to smear these men and jeopardize their lives and fair trails.”

Proud Boy Pals and Drinking Buddies Enrique Tarrio and Joseph Biggs at a rally before they were charged with Seditious Conspiracy by the Biden Regime.

The January 6th Select Committee undoubtedly knew about this video as well- yet they still decided to move forward during their first hearing and nail the Proud Boys to a cross by knowingly accusing them of tremendous false crimes.

These Committee members hid exculpatory evidence from the American people after looking into the cameras and promising to tell the American people “the truth about January 6th”.

Proud Boy Ethan “Ruffio” Nordean before his pre-trial detainment.

“The January 6th Hearings have made it impossible for the Proud Boys on this indictment to ever get a fair shake at a trial,” said Ryan. “They demonized the Proud Boys and accused them of seditious conspiracy in a ‘special video presentation’ before their trials. The Proud Boys charges should be dropped and these Congresspeople held liable for conspiring to falsify evidence.”

This is the perfect example of how the government continues to withhold important information from the people of the United States about a day as important as January 6th.
This is one of hundreds of unreleased videos that can potentially exonerate defendants.

“The court of public opinion will decide the fate of these men,” said Ryan.

Ryan ended with this:  “It is completely unethical that this type of evidence has been held from the public and manipulated to frame these men for the ‘crime of the century’. These prosecutors and Congresspeople must be held accountable.”

Categories
Back Door Power Grab COVID Faked news Leftist Virtue(!) Reprints from others.

Reprint: How Masking Did Us Wrong

By Susan Dunham

The Dark Side of an Easy Ask
The mask experiment showed us just how well we would take to a Lord-of-the-Flies level rewrite of social norms overnight.

As an example of this, I was volunteering at a St. Vincent De Paul thrift store. While bringing in a bag of donated clothing, and not wearing a mask since I had been eating a snack, I was confronted by a retired nurse (who should have known better) who — among other things  — said “Don’t you respect us?!?”

Fortunately for her, I didn’t reply.  But after a couple more incidents with other people (although I’m sure she instigated a confrontation with another person,too). I told one of the supervisors that I was going home and wouldn’t be volunteering there anymore because of the harassment. He sadly agreed about the atmosphere. That was the summer of 2021 –18 MONTHS after the CCP virus has shown up in the states.

Mask up or else!

Categories
Back Door Power Grab Biden Pandemic COVID Politics Polls Progressive Racism Reprints from others. Science

Moral Blinding: How the COVID-Prevention Fetish Killed Critical Thinking

This article was written by Susan Dunham.

Feeling the fuzzies

Our first lockdown was like a great war effort. It was the closest we’ve come to the home-front experience of the World Wars, when people set aside every selfish thought in favor of the collective wellbeing. We ground our lives to a halt in a powerful rebuke against an emerging threat. Heroes emerged, along with new rituals to honor them as we banged pots for frontline workers and decorated our neighborhoods with messages of thanks. Meanwhile, the rest of us did our part: we stayed home. And it all felt good.

Months later, rising COVID cases have plunged us into another lockdown, which in short order has become a practiced routine. After a lax summer and fall season, we slip back into the usual stay-at-home restrictions. We triple our vigilance: we keep our distance, follow the masking rules, and sanitize compulsively. “Be safe,” we wish each other in lieu of the customary farewells. Even the fearless pitch in, because staying safe means preventing yourself from becoming a threat to others.

All of the prescribed safety practices have become part of a new social ritual. Participation demonstrates one’s commitment to the collective wellbeing, which the pandemic has taught us is not an individual game but a group effort. Masking, sanitizing, distancing, and isolating are not only safety measures in the traditional sense but they have also become the new signs of caring. And they are fast becoming a prerequisite for societal participation. No mask, no service says many signs in store windows, big and small.

As Canadians, long-renowned for politeness, compliance under these terms is practically built into the national DNA. Save for some pockets of protests in our larger cities, we have demonstrated a willingness to give up a little bit of our personal freedom for the greater good, and we embrace whatever is asked of us if it can save a life.

But is that really such a good thing? Could it be that our impassioned acceptance of drastic new norms makes us a little too willing to compromise on everything if we can be convinced it’s the righteous thing to do? And has our conscience been hijacked so that we consent to new norms that actually dismantle the progress we’ve made towards a free and open society?

I argue that the COVID crisis has turned a once liberal society into a cult of compliance and that we have sold off an open marketplace of ideas in a bid to secure our safety. In its place we have built a new social operating system that coerces consent and could one day render us incapable of seeing the true effects of policies that masquerade as public good..

Creating tunnel vision

While we were placing “Stay at Home” badges on top of our Instagram selfies, congratulating ourselves for staying inside, The World Food Program — an agency of the UN — was reporting that 130 million more people in developing nations would face starvation by the end of the year as a direct result of the global economy which we ground to a halt. That means tens of millions of additional deaths in developing countries because of lockdown.

At home we knew that suicide numbers must have skyrocketed and that countless unstable home lives turned dramatically worse, while food bank lines extended longer than we had ever seen them.

But rather than these realities sobering us out of our moral stupor, they instead inspired us to double-down on the categorical importance of lockdown, even as we were learning that most people are not at serious risk of severe illness. No cost was too high to prevent one more COVID case.

Months later, with better perspective on the costs of lockdown, we find ourselves in yet another one. Although we entered it with reduced appetite for the same kind of stringency we saw last spring, we have dutifully complied with everything that the case numbers have demanded. We’ve thrown out every skeptic thought, because the unquantified concerns of mental health, childhood developmental delay, economic collapse, and mass death by starvation the world over do not hold an audience more powerfully than the running tally of COVID cases, hospitalizations, and deaths.

The constant beat of daily broadcast COVID briefings and the bombardment of public health messaging play no small part in constructing our perception of the coronavirus threat. Reshaping our lives to avoid a virus seems logical and inevitable when the only metric we’re allowed to hear is the COVID numbers. How naturally all other facets of life seem to fall away when we are properly obsessed over a single problem to the exclusion of all others.

This curation of concern single-handedly drives our collective reaction to the emergent coronavirus. Our laser focus on all things COVID creates a kind of team spirit in the wellness effort, encouraging our embrace of the pain-loving self sacrifice of lockdown — and blinding us to both its costs and its alternatives.

Affirming the course

By now we should have heard from our public health policy-makers that instead of blanket lockdown, we might opt for a model that is business-as-usual with the exception of a full marshaling of resources aimed at those who self-identify as vulnerable and full support for only their isolation. We don’t question the absence of this suggestion because we have been so locked onto the altruistic idea of self-sacrifice for the greater good that any kind of debate would seem selfishly motivated.

Instead we indulge in the joy of pitching-in and doing good, while remaining guiltlessly ignorant of the fact that history might look back upon lockdown as a devastating mistake. Meanwhile, we collect our CERB cheques and boast about the moral virtues of remaining indefinitely couch-bound. Thus we are placated by a public health policy that we should be debating at the very least.

The great opiate of public health stewardship makes us feel so assured of our righteousness that questioning health regulations is morally suspect. We look unkindly at the oppositional thinker, the lockdown skeptic who threatens to upend the whole care-making experience of the COVID era. Whereas normally we would give skeptical voices vital consideration, especially before embracing the drastic new normal we’ve been handed, we instead condemn them out of hand because we are pre-conditioned to despise their very premise.

Much analysis is given to the pandemic response on the government level, but it is our pandemic response on the social level which will prove the most significant to history, because that is where the true forces of lasting change carve out their legacies.

The on-the-ground tensions between the majority of us who embrace policy and those who don’t is the effect of a social phenomenon which has demonstrated an enormous capacity to reshape our world. What we are gripped by is a peculiar kind of collective blindness disguised as goodwill and righteousness that turns us against all forms of debate on public policy so long as it is positioned correctly.

Dehumanizing the rebel

Toronto’s first lockdown protest in April drew the ire of a vocal majority who denounced participants as selfish, small-minded, ignorant, and reckless. These were anti-science bigots whose ideas literally endangered lives. They thumbed their noses at the new rituals which were meanwhile bringing the city together. The protests grew in number and in frequency into the summer months. Demonstrators were spared no ill will by the court of public opinion. Many commentators openly wished they see their comeuppance in the form of a hospital bed, and such tidings were met with all round applause.

There is no moral standing, as we see it, from which to question the edicts of the health experts. Our enthusiastic focus on the wellness effort has morphed into a complete intolerance for debate on the issue. We are so emboldened by our collective struggle that we feel morally justified in throwing all opposition into the fire.

Thus we’ve become locked into a radical, all-in moral defense of new and unprecedented rules. Such a rabid mode of categorical compliance establishes a dangerous low in our capacity for critically, rather than emotionally, perceiving the issues we face. We now despise rebellious thinking, even if those deviant ideas might be our life raft out of dangerous waters.

While the Coronavirus is often said to have brought out the best in us — with our pot-banging and our well-wishing — all of this team-building has produced, almost by necessity, a dark response to doubting voices.

Silencing doubt

SARS-COV-2 has changed our reaction to voices that oppose the crowd. Whereas in the past, outlier thinking, skepticism of mainstream messaging and policy makers, nonconformity in the face of social pressure were all tolerated if not welcomed, now we deem these things dangerous, not stimulating.

The pain of the pandemic, which has shown us what can happen when people adopt the wrong kinds of opinions, has made us hypersensitive to regressive views on other global issues like climate change, vaccination, social justice, even politics, in which the actions of the individual can affect the group. We have seen the consequence of too much freedom of thought in the form of lockdowns and packed ICUs, and we bristle to think what future crises might unfold if the wrong opinions gain traction again.

So we put extra effort into vilifying harmful views. If we have to contend with freedom of speech and freedom of thought, then we get around that obstacle by making unsafe views so socially toxic that they’re more dangerous for the speaker than they are for society. Be caught courting an unsanctioned idea and get branded an enemy of the public good. Suddenly yesterday’s eccentric thinker is today’s ignorant, selfish, uneducated bigot.

The ideological cooling effect of such a social mechanism is an effective tool for steering opinion and, as the pandemic has demonstrated, behavior too.

Saving face

Universal masking and protocol compliance has been so effectively adopted precisely because it has become socially untenable to do otherwise. To be caught without a mask, that brilliant piece of cloth that shows you care, is to forfeit your status as a well-meaning member of society.

And so we have it that much of the moral fetishization of COVID protocols — the excessive displays of complying well beyond the public guidelines — has become a way of signifying ideological affinity. So repellent is the image of the COVID skeptic that COVID compliance has become as much about self-image as it is about public safety — if not more.

We find ourselves trapped within a new social formula in which conformity is social currency. The more one over-performs the prescribed duties and rituals of the good citizen, the more approval is bestowed, and the more distance the performer creates between themselves and the looming image of the social monster.

In this paradigm, independent thinking — synthesizing available data into more nuanced or perhaps contradictory conclusions — is taboo. The social rewards of conformity far outweigh the immoral stink of rebellious thought. It simply becomes no longer worth the shame, stigma, self-doubt, and the bother of holding and sharing a competing idea.

There is no end in sight to this new model now that we have set it into motion. It has been embraced during pandemic and the gears are already turning to point this machinery towards other global efforts. It is our new social operating system — and it has already proven its capacity to reshape society without limitation. Consider how absurd the notion would have been just over a year ago that it would be reprehensible to be caught barefaced in a grocery store. What absurdities today will we reconstruct as the moral obligations of tomorrow?

We now have a framework for coercing total compliance to new and changing rules and rituals, which need no backing by logic or sense. How many truly contradictory public protocols do we now follow for the sake of optics alone? We jump into the street to give space to fellow pedestrians even though there is no realistic concern for transmission in this way. Proof and reason become redundancies — at most, formalities. If the Coronavirus ever ceases to be a concern, how many people will truly abandon masking when it has become so ingrained as a symbol of prudence and altruism? Compliance becomes its own end when its made synonymous with moral good.

And thus a moral blinding has stricken society. COVID-19 has gathered us so tightly around the bonfire of cooperation, either by conversion or coercion, that we have found no better place to be, and we have lost our tolerance for anyone refusing to join. We’ve completely annexed our capacity to judge what is being asked of us dispassionately, leaving open an unguarded pathway to our consent through both our heartstrings and our self-image.

Losing Control

The foundation is laid for future incursions into our daily normal, which have no hope of encountering resistance. The next radical social change need only be positioned as the next good thing, and even in the mind of the conflicted individual, doubt will be set aside in favor of appearance. Woe to anyone with the misfortune of disagreeing, because an intense, scapegoating hatred for those who do not comply will justify any manner of policy, punishment, and correction against them. And social spoils will await the loudest and most zealous followers and enforcers of whatever new normal the future cooks up.

We have burned our safety net against tyranny. Rather than doing the hard thing, respecting an individual’s right to self-direction even at a marginal expense of safety, we wage war on thought, between right-think and wrong-think, good action versus bad action so that we may burn every deviant in our path.

Sealing our fate

Through a system of self-adulating social rituals, single-minded public messaging, and stigmatization of the uncooperative, we have lost our capacity to see the shades of gray between extremes and to recognize the fundamental merits of debate and the freedom to dissent. We now prefer that every last skeptic be shamed into compliance, as if the benefit of that is worth the cost of forcing a free society into a hive mind.

We have so easily forgotten that it is in the dialectic of competing views — some for this side, others for that side — that we prevent any one extreme from over-dominating. And it is precisely by the moral exclusion of oppositional views that a population finds itself one day in a world it doesn’t recognize.

So while the world stampedes in lockstep towards new extremes of safety protocols, we are in danger of a well-intentioned agenda breaking away from itself and running ahead of its own mandate if there is no one left to one day challenge it.

And yet the average person shakes their head to learn of the latest citizen to defy protocol.

In just a few short months, the old liberal mindset that would have called for a balance between safety and liberty, that would have rejected the idea that science offers only one way through a crisis, that would have accepted the foundational need for some dissent, has eroded into a culture of compliance. To obey is to care. That is the equation that has reprogrammed our social order. And if it might benefit us today, it could more easily hurt us tomorrow, the next time something to which we wouldn’t normally consent finds that tested appeal to our hearts.